Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-qxdb6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T17:09:58.274Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Laboratory diagnosis and clinical significance of rubella in children with cancer

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 May 2009

D. J. Morris ,
P. Morgan-Capner ,
D. J. Wood ,
M. Dalton ,
J. Wright ,
H. I. J. Thomas  and
R.F. Stevens
D. J. Morris
Affiliation:
North Manchester Regional Virus Laboratory, Booth Hall Children's Hospital, Manchester M9 2AA, UK
P. Morgan-Capner
Affiliation:
Department of Virology, Preston Infirmary, Preston PR1 6PS, UK
D. J. Wood
Affiliation:
North Manchester Regional Virus Laboratory, Booth Hall Children's Hospital, Manchester M9 2AA, UK
M. Dalton
Affiliation:
Department of Paediatric Oncology, Royal Manchester Children's Hospital, Manchester M27 1HA, UK
J. Wright
Affiliation:
Department of Virology, Preston Infirmary, Preston PR1 6PS, UK
H. I. J. Thomas
Affiliation:
Department of Virology, Preston Infirmary, Preston PR1 6PS, UK
R.F. Stevens
Affiliation:
Department of Paediatric Oncology, Royal Manchester Children's Hospital, Manchester M27 1HA, UK
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Virus-specific antibody responses were studied in 12 children with cancer in whom rubella was diagnosed by seroconversion or a rising titre (≥ fourfold) of haemagglutination inhibiting (HI) antibody. Our results confirmed the difficulties of making a diagnosis of rubella infection in immunocompromised children using criteria for interpreting antibody assays established in immunocompetent patients. Specific IgM antibody persisted for more than 2 months in 7 of 10 children with probable primary rubella, 3 of whom had high concentrations of such antibody 6, 7 and 11 months after the rash. Radial haemolysis and specific IgG1 and IgG3 antibody responses were low in 4, 2, and 4 patients, respectively. One child apparently had a rubella reinfection and, in another, rubella antibody passively acquired from blood transfusions was probably responsible for the HI seroconversion. Nonetheless, the benign clinical course of rubella in immunocompromised children was confirmed.

Type
Research Article
Information
Epidemiology & Infection , Volume 103 , Issue 3 , December 1989 , pp. 643 - 649
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1989

References

REFERENCES

1.Wood, DJ, Corbitt, G.Viral infections in childhood leukemia. J Infect Dis 1985; 152: 266–73.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
2.Best, JM, Banatvala, JE, Rubella, In: Zuckerman, AJ, Banatvala, JE, Pattison, JR, eds. Principles and practice of clinical virology. Chichester: John Wiley and Sons, 1987: 315–53.Google Scholar
3.Thomas, HIJ, Morgan-Capner, P.Specific IgG subclass antibody in rubella virus infections. Epidemiol Infect 1988; 100: 443–54.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
4.Pizzo, PA.Infectious complications in the child with cancer. II. Management of specific infectious organisms. J Pediatr 1981; 98: 513–23.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
5.Feldman, S, Cox, F.Viral infections and haematological malignancies. Clin Haematol 1976; 5:311–28.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
6.Levine, AS, Schimpff, SC, Graw, RG Jr, Young, RC.Hematologic malignancies and other bone marrow failure states: progress in the management of complicating infections. Semin Hematol 1974; 11: 141–202.Google Scholar
7.Korinthenberg, R, Breu, H, Palm, D, Jansen, P.Acute haemorrhagic meningo-encephalitis due to rubella in acute lymphatic leukaemia. Klin Pediatr 1977; 189: 472–6.Google Scholar
8.Mortimer, PP, Tedder, RS, Hambling, MH, Shafi, MS, Burkhardt, F, Schilt, U.Antibody capture radioimmunoassay for anti-rubella IgM. J Hyg 1981; 86: 139–53.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
9.Pattison, JRThe laboratory investigation of rubella. London: Public Health Laboratory Service. 1982. (Public Health Laboratory Service Monograph No. 16).Google Scholar
10.Morgan-Capner, P, Burgess, C, Fisher-Hoch, SRadial haemolysis for the detection of rubella antibody in acute postnatal rubella. J Hyg 1982; 89: 311–20.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
11.Meurman, DH.Persistence of immunoglobulin G and immunoglobulin M antibodies after postnatal rubella infection determined by solid-phase radioimmunoassay. J Clin Microbiol 1978; 7: 34–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
12.O'Shea, S, Best, JM, Banatvala, JE, Shepherd, WM.Development and persistence of class-specific antibodies in the serum and nasopharyngeal washings of rubella vaccinees. J Infect Dis 1985; 151:89–98.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
13.Al-Nakib, W, Best, JM, Banatvala, JE.Rubella-specific serum and nasopharyngeal immunoglobulin responses following naturally acquired and vaccine-induced infection. Prolonged persistence of virus-specific IgM. Lancet 1975; i: 182–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
14.Pattison, JR, Dane, DS, Mace, JE.Persistence of specific IgM after natural infection with rubella virus. Lancet 1975; i: 185–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
15.Morgan-Capner, P, Hodgson, J, Hambling, MH et al. Detection of rubella reinfection in pregnancy. Lancet 1985; i: 244–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
16.Pass, RF, Griffiths, PD, August, AM.Antibody response to cytomegalovirus after renal transplantation: comparison of patients with primary and recurrent infection. J Infect Dis 1983; 147: 40–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
17.Wreghitt, TG, Taylor, CED, Banatvala, JE, Bryant, J, Wallwork, J.Concurrent cytomegalovirus and Coxsackie B virus infections in a heart-lung transplant recipient. J Infect 1986; 13: 51–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar