Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26245352›Full record

ArticleClinical and vaccine immunology : CVI2015

Evaluation of the Specificity of Two Enzyme Immunoassays for Coccidioidomycosis by Using Sera from a Region of Endemicity and a Region of Nonendemicity.

Mark D Lindsley, YoonJi Ahn, Orion McCotter, Lalitha Gade, Steven F Hurst, Mary E Brandt, Benjamin J Park, Anastasia P Litvintseva

Open access · diamondAbstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical and vaccine immunology : CVI, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 21% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Mark D LindsleyMycotic Diseases Branch, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia, USA mlindsley@cdc.gov.
YoonJi AhnMycotic Diseases Branch, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
Orion McCotterMycotic Diseases Branch, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
Lalitha GadeMycotic Diseases Branch, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
Steven F HurstMycotic Diseases Branch, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
Mary E BrandtMycotic Diseases Branch, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
Benjamin J ParkDivision of Healthcare Quality Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
Anastasia P LitvintsevaMycotic Diseases Branch, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Coccidioidomycosis (CM), a serious life-threatening fungal infection endemic to arid regions of the western United States and Mexico, can be challenging to diagnose in a timely manner. Commercially developed enzyme immunoassays (EIAs) (from Meridian Biosciences and Immuno-Mycologics [IMMY]) have provided faster, simpler means for serodiagnosis; however, independent evaluations have questioned EIA specificity, particularly IgM-positive/IgG-negative results. This study was conducted to evaluate EIA specificity among persons residing in Puerto Rico (n = 534), where CM is not endemic (who were not likely to have been exposed to Coccidioides spp.), compared to blood bank donors residing in Arizona (n = 1,218), where CM is endemic. Upon comparing serum reactivity between Puerto Rico and Arizona, the Meridian EIA showed a significant difference in IgG reactivity (0.37% versus 3.6%; P < 0.001) but not IgM reactivity (3.4% versus 2.4%; P = 0.31). No IgM-/IgG-reactive sera were detected among sera from Puerto Rico, compared to 7 (0.57%) sera from Arizona. Similar results were observed using the IMMY EIA, although significantly (P = 0.03) fewer IgM-reactive sera from Arizona were observed, compared to the Meridian EIA. EIA-reactive sera were also evaluated by immunodiffusion before and after 3- to 4-fold concentration of the sera. These results demonstrate that elevated IgG EIA reactivity is present in sera from healthy individuals in regions of endemicity and that IgM EIA reactivity observed in sera from individuals residing outside regions of endemicity is most likely nonspecific. Other criteria, including clinical and microbiological evaluations, should be taken into account when interpreting results from surveillance studies and other reporting measures.

Indexed as

Antibodies, FungalArizonaCoccidioidesCoccidioidomycosisEndemic DiseasesHealthy VolunteersHumansImmunodiffusionImmunoenzyme TechniquesImmunoglobulin GImmunoglobulin MMexicoPuerto RicoReagent Kits, DiagnosticSensitivity and SpecificitySerologic TestsAntibodies, FungalImmunoglobulin GImmunoglobulin MReagent Kits, Diagnostic

Identifiers

PMID26245352
PMCPMC4580743
OpenAlexW2234188228

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.