Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

The application of an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay or an immunofluorescent assay test leads to different estimates of seroprevalence of Coxiella burnetii in the population

  • G. J. BLAAUW (a1) (a2), D. W. NOTERMANS (a3), B. SCHIMMER (a3), J. MEEKELENKAMP (a1), J. H. J. REIMERINK (a3), P. TEUNIS (a3) and P. M. SCHNEEBERGER (a1) (a3)...

Summary

The diagnosis and epidemiological studies of Q fever depend on serology. Among the main methods employed are the enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) and the immunofluorescent assay test (IFAT). We show that two commercial assays representing the two methods with two different cut-off titres can lead to significant differences in diagnostic and seroprevalence estimates. This in turn emphasizes the need for a standardized gold method to compare the various assays; whether this standard is ‘in-house’ or commercially obtained.

  • View HTML
    • Send article to Kindle

      To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

      Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

      Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

      The application of an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay or an immunofluorescent assay test leads to different estimates of seroprevalence of Coxiella burnetii in the population
      Available formats
      ×

      Send article to Dropbox

      To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

      The application of an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay or an immunofluorescent assay test leads to different estimates of seroprevalence of Coxiella burnetii in the population
      Available formats
      ×

      Send article to Google Drive

      To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

      The application of an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay or an immunofluorescent assay test leads to different estimates of seroprevalence of Coxiella burnetii in the population
      Available formats
      ×

Copyright

Corresponding author

*Author for correspondence: Mr G. J. Blaauw, Albert Schweitzerlaan 31, 7334 DZ, Apeldoorn, The Netherlands. (Email: g.blaauw@gelre.nl)

References

Hide All
1.Maurin, M, Raoult, D. Q fever. Clinical Microbiology Reviews 1999; 12: 518553.
2.Dupuis, G, et al. An important outbreak of human Q fever in a Swiss alpine valley. International Journal of Epidemiology 1987; 16: 282287.
3.Dupont, HT, Thirion, X, Raoult, D. Q fever serology: cutoff determination for microimmunofluorescence. Clinical and Diagnostic Laboratory Immunology 1994; 1: 189196.
4.Bartelink, AK, et al. Acute and chronic Q fever; epidemiology, symptoms, diagnosis and therapy of infection caused by Coxiella burnetii [in Dutch]. Nederlands Tijdschrift voor Geneeskunde 2000; 144: 13031306.
5.Waag, D, et al. Validation of an enzyme immunoassay for serodiagnosis of acute Q fever. European Journal of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases 1995; 14: 421427.
6.Fournier, PE, Marrie, TJ, Raoult, D. Diagnosis of Q fever. Journal of Clinical Microbiology 1998; 36: 18231834.
7.Kilic, S, et al. Prevalence of Coxiella burnetii antibodies in blood donors in Ankara, central Anatolia, Turkey. New Microbiologica 2008; 31: 527534.
8.Pape, M, et al. Seroprevalence of Coxiella burnetii in a healthy population from northern Greece. Clinical Microbiology and Infection 2009; 15: 148149.
9.Cardenosa, N, et al. Short report: Seroprevalence of human infection by Coxiella burnetii in Barcelona (Northeast of Spain). American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene 2006; 75: 3335.
10.Bolanos, M, et al. Seroprevalence of infection by Coxiella burnetii in Canary Islands (Spain). European Journal of Epidemiology 2003; 18: 259262.
11.Karagiannis, I, et al. Q fever outbreak in the Netherlands: a preliminary report. Eurosurveillance 2007; 12: E0708092.
12.Karagiannis, I, et al. Investigation of a Q fever outbreak in a rural area of the Netherlands 2009. Epidemiology and Infection; 137: 12831294.
13.Schimmer, B, et al. Large ongoing Q fever outbreak in the south of The Netherlands. Eurosurveillance 2008; 13: pii=18 939.
14.Schimmer, B, et al. Sustained intensive transmission of Q fever in the south of the Netherlands, Eurosurveillance 2009; 14: pii=19 120.
15.Schimmer, B, et al. Q fever in The Netherlands: an update on the epidemiology and control measures. Eurosurveillance 2010; 15: pii=19 520.
16.Villumsen, S, et al. Determination of new cutoff values for indirect immunofluorescence antibody test for Q fever diagnosis in Denmark. Diagnostic Microbiology and Infectious Diseases 2009; 65: 9398.
17.Cowley, R, et al. Enzyme immunoassay for Q fever: comparison with complement fixation and immunofluorescence tests and dot immunoblotting. Journal of Clinical Microbiology 1992; 30: 24512455.
18.Peter, O, et al. Comparison of enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay and complement fixation and indirect fluorescent-antibody tests for detection of Coxiella burnetii antibody. Journal of Clinical Microbiology 1987; 25: 10631067.
19.D'Harcourt, SC, et al. Comparison of immunofluorescence with enzyme immunoassay for detection of Q fever. European Journal of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases 1996; 15: 749752.
20.Field, PR, et al. Comparison of a commercial enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay with immunofluorescence and complement fixation tests for detection of Coxiella burnetii (Q fever) immunoglobulin M. Journal of Clinical Microbiology 2000; 38: 16451647.
21.Field, PR, et al. Evaluation of a novel commercial enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay detecting Coxiella burnetii-specific immunoglobulin G for Q fever prevaccination screening and diagnosis. Journal of Clinical Microbiology 2002; 40: 35263529.
22.Frangoulidis, D, et al. Comparison of four commercially available assays for the detection of IgM phase II antibodies to Coxiella burnetii in the diagnosis of acute Q fever. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 2006; 1078: 561562.
23.Sanz, JC, et al. Application of four ELISA techniques (two for IgM and two for IgG) for serological diagnosis of an outbreak of Q fever [in Spanish]. Enfermedades Infecciosas y Microbiologíca Clínica 2006; 24: 178181.
24.Setinoyo, A, et al. New Criteria for immunofluorecence assay for Q fever diagnosis in Japan 2005. Journal of Clinical Microbiology; 43: 55555559.
25.Slabá, K, Skultéty, L, Toman, R. Efficiency of various serological techniques for diagnosing Coxiella burnetii infection. Acta Virologica 2005; 49: 123127.
26.Dupuis, G, et al. Immunoglobulin responses in acute Q fever. Journal of Clinical Microbiology 1985; 22: 484487.

Keywords

The application of an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay or an immunofluorescent assay test leads to different estimates of seroprevalence of Coxiella burnetii in the population

  • G. J. BLAAUW (a1) (a2), D. W. NOTERMANS (a3), B. SCHIMMER (a3), J. MEEKELENKAMP (a1), J. H. J. REIMERINK (a3), P. TEUNIS (a3) and P. M. SCHNEEBERGER (a1) (a3)...

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed