Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T05:54:13.687Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Diagnosis of recent hepatitis A infection: a comparison of two methods for detecting specific IgM

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 March 2010

P. P. Mortimer ,
J. V. Parry  and
Hazel Appleton
P. P. Mortimer
Affiliation:
Virus Reference Laboratory, Central Public Health Laboratory, Colindale Avenue, London NW9 5HT
J. V. Parry
Affiliation:
Virus Reference Laboratory, Central Public Health Laboratory, Colindale Avenue, London NW9 5HT
Hazel Appleton
Affiliation:
Virus Reference Laboratory, Central Public Health Laboratory, Colindale Avenue, London NW9 5HT
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.

Radioimmunoassay (RIA) tests for anti-hepatitis A virus (HAV) IgM were carried out on 728 sera: 382 were tested by both a method using an anti-μ serum bound to a solid phase and a method involving preliminary separation of IgM by sucrose density gradient (SDG) centrifugation, 354 by the anti-μ method alone and two by the SDG method alone. Similar proportions of sera were found to be positive by each method (42·5%, 41·7%), but equivocal results were commoner by the SDG method (4·7% compared with 1·5%). There were 21 (5·5%) discrepant results from the sera tested by both methods, 20 of which could have been due to the higher sensitivity of the anti-μ method.

The SDG method generally gave unequivocal results on sera collected within six weeks of the onset of jaundice. Separation of the IgM fraction by re-orientation centrifugation was quick, but otherwise offered no special advantage over separation on a swing-out rotor. The use of 2 mercaptoethanol (2 ME) reduction to assess the purity of the IgM fraction increased confidence in the specificity of the test. It led, however, to the exclusion of 16 reactive sera (4·2%), all of which were found to be positive in the anti-μ test.

The anti-μ method gave better discrimination between positive and negative sera than the SDG method and detected IgM both earlier and later in infection. The results of tests designed to check the specificity of the anti-μ procedure were satisfactory. As it is potentially cheaper and easier to perform, the anti-μ method seems, in all respects, to be superior to the SDG method.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Hygiene , Volume 86 , Issue 1 , February 1981 , pp. 71 - 78
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1981

References

REFERENCES

Bradley, D. W., Fields, H. A., McCaustland, K. A., Maynard, J. E., Decker, R. H., Whittington, R. & Overby, L. R. (1979). Serodiagnosis of viral hepatitis A by a modified competitive binding radioimmunoassay for immunoglobulin M anti-hepatitis A virus. Journal of Clinical Microbiology 9, 120–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bradley, D. W., Maynard, J. E., Hindman, S. H., Hornbeck, C. L., Fields, H. A., McCaustland, K. A. & Cook, E. H. Jr. (1977). Serodiagnosis of viral hepatitis A: detection of acute-phase immunoglobulin M anti-hepatitis A virus by radioimmunoassay. Journal of Clinical Microbiology 5, 521–30.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bolton, A. E. & Hunter, W. M. (1973). The labelling of proteins to high specific radio activities by conjugation to a 125I-containing acylating agent. Biochemical Journal 133, 529–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Duermeyer, W., Wielaard, F. & van der Veen, J. (1979). A new principle for the detection of specific IgM antibodies applied in an Elisa for hepatitis A. Journal of Medical Virology 4, 25–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Edwards, J. M. B. & McSwiggan, D. A. (1974). Studies on the diagnostic value of an immunofluorescence test for EB virus-specific IgM. Journal of Clinical Pathology 27, 647–51.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Flehmig, B., Ranke, M., Berthold, H. & Gerth, H. J. (1979). A solid-phase radioimmunoassay for detection of IgM antibodies to hepatitis A virus. Journal of Infectious Diseases 140, 169–75.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Frösner, G. G., Deinhardt, F., Scheid, R., Gauss-Müller, V., Holmes, N., Mosselberger, V., Siegl, G. & Alexander, J. J. (1979 a). Propagation of human hepatitis A virus in a hepatoma cell line. Infection 7, 303–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frösner, G. G., Schield, R., Wolf, H. & Deinhardt, F. (1979 b). Immunoglobulin M anti-hepatitis A virus determination by reorienting gradient centrifugation for diagnosis of acute hepatitis A. Journal of Clinical Microbiology 9, 476–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mortimer, P. P., Vandervelde, E. M. & Parry, J. V. (1979). Serological evidence for recent infection with hepatitis A virus following an institutional outbreak of hepatitis. Journal of Infection 1, 269–75.Google Scholar
Mortimer, P. P., Vandervelde, E. M.Parry, J. V., Cohen, B. J. & Tedder, R. S. (1981). The anti-HBc IgM response in the acute and convalescent phases of acute hepatitis. Journal of Infection. (In press.)CrossRefGoogle Scholar