ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology2021
Anti-Human T-Cell Leukemia Virus Type 1 (HTLV-1) Antibody Assays in Cerebrospinal Fluid for the Diagnosis of HTLV-1-Associated Myelopathy/Tropical Spastic Paraparesis.
Article in Journal of clinical microbiology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The anti-human T-cell leukemia virus type 1 (HTLV-1) antibody assay in common use has changed from the particle agglutination (PA) method to chemiluminescent immunoassay (CLIA) and chemiluminescent enzyme immunoassay (CLEIA). These assays were validated in serum but not in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF). However, anti-HTLV-1 antibody positivity in CSF is a requisite for diagnosing HTLV-1-associated myelopathy/tropical spastic paraparesis (HAM/TSP). We qualitatively compared the assays in CSF from 47 HAM/TSP patients diagnosed using PA, 15 HTLV-1 carriers (HCs), and 18 negative controls. In determining the positivity or negativity of CSF anti-HTLV-1 antibodies, we used serum cutoff points for CLIA and CLEIA because CSF cutoff points had not been decided. Truth table analysis revealed that the performance of CLIA was closer to that of PA and that CLEIA had low sensitivity. CSF antibodies from HAM/TSP patients were all positive by PA and CLIA but 83.0% positive by CLEIA. CSF antibodies from HCs were positive in 73.3%, 80.0%, and 6.7% by PA, CLIA, and CLEIA, respectively. Receiver operator characteristic curve analysis for CSF revealed that with the default cutoff point used for serum, CLIA and PA had comparable performances and CLEIA was less sensitive. The best performances of CLIA and CLEIA with adjusted cutoff points were 94.8% sensitivity and 95.5% specificity and 89.7% sensitivity and 95.5% specificity, respectively. We conclude that low-sensitivity CLEIA can underdiagnose HAM/TSP and that CLIA is a better alternative to PA in anti-HTLV-1 antibody assay for CSF with the current cutoff points.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.