Evaluation of 10 serological assays for diagnosing Mycoplasma pneumoniae infection.

Laurent Busson, Sigi Van den Wijngaert, Hafid Dahma, Marc Decolvenaer, Lina Di Cesare, Agnes Martin, Liesbet Vasseur, Olivier Vandenberg
Author Information
  1. Laurent Busson: Department of Microbiology, Porte de Hal Laboratory, Saint-Pierre University Hospital & Jules Bordet Institute, Brussels, Belgium. laurent_busson@stpierre-bru.be

Abstract

In this study, the performance of 10 serological assays for the diagnosis of Mycoplasma pneumoniae infection was evaluated. A total of 145 sera from 120 patients were tested. They were obtained from patients who were serologically positive for M. pneumoniae infection as well as from patients who were infected with micro-organisms that may cause interstitial pneumonia. The following assays were utilized: SeroMP IgM and IgG, SeroMP recombinant IgM, IgA and IgG, Liaison M. pneumoniae IgM and IgG and M. pneumoniae IgM, IgA and IgG ELISA Medac. The SeroMP Recombinant and Liaison assays both showed low IgM specificity, and crossreactivity was mainly observed in groups of patients with acute cytomegalovirus and Epstein-Barr virus infections. For IgA, the Medac assay was less specific than the SeroMP Recombinant assay. Discrepancies between the four tests were observed in IgG analyses, and due to the lack of a gold standard, 22 results were removed prior to determining the sensitivity and specificity. Therefore, the overall performance of IgG assays may be overstated; nevertheless, the SeroMP assay demonstrated a lack of sensitivity. The seroprevalence of IgG appears to be very low, raising concerns regarding whether the serological techniques can detect IgG levels over time. Serology remains a biological tool of choice for diagnosing M. pneumoniae infection, but improvement and standardization of the assays are needed, particularly for the determination of IgG.

References

  1. Clin Microbiol Rev. 1997 Apr;10(2):242-56 [PMID: 9105753]
  2. Clin Diagn Lab Immunol. 2000 Sep;7(5):734-8 [PMID: 10973446]
  3. Clin Infect Dis. 1993 Aug;17 Suppl 1:S37-46 [PMID: 8399936]
  4. Eur Respir J. 2012 Oct;40(4):931-8 [PMID: 22267760]
  5. Clin Microbiol Rev. 2004 Oct;17(4):697-728, table of contents [PMID: 15489344]
  6. J Clin Microbiol. 2010 Sep;48(9):3380-2 [PMID: 20610673]
  7. Clin Diagn Lab Immunol. 2004 Sep;11(5):862-7 [PMID: 15358644]
  8. J Clin Microbiol. 2003 Nov;41(11):4915-23 [PMID: 14605118]
  9. J Clin Microbiol. 2006 Feb;44(2):643-5 [PMID: 16455935]
  10. Euro Surveill. 2012 Feb 09;17(6): [PMID: 22340972]
  11. J Clin Microbiol. 2001 Mar;39(3):1184-6 [PMID: 11230455]
  12. Clin Diagn Lab Immunol. 2000 Sep;7(5):778-80 [PMID: 10973454]
  13. J Clin Microbiol. 2005 May;43(5):2277-85 [PMID: 15872256]
  14. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 2012 Jun;73(2):200-3 [PMID: 22502960]

MeSH Term

Adolescent
Adult
Antibodies, Bacterial
Child
Cytomegalovirus
Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay
Epstein-Barr Virus Infections
Female
Humans
Immunoglobulin A
Immunoglobulin G
Immunoglobulin M
Male
Mycoplasma pneumoniae
Pneumonia, Mycoplasma
Sensitivity and Specificity
Seroepidemiologic Studies
Serologic Tests
Young Adult

Chemicals

Antibodies, Bacterial
Immunoglobulin A
Immunoglobulin G
Immunoglobulin M

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0IgGassayspneumoniaeSeroMPIgMinfectionpatientsMserologicalIgAassayperformance10MycoplasmamayLiaisonMedacRecombinantlowspecificityobservedlacksensitivitydiagnosingstudydiagnosisevaluatedtotal145sera120testedobtainedserologicallypositivewellinfectedmicro-organismscauseinterstitialpneumoniafollowingutilized:recombinantELISAshowedcrossreactivitymainlygroupsacutecytomegalovirusEpstein-BarrvirusinfectionslessspecificDiscrepanciesfourtestsanalysesduegoldstandard22resultsremovedpriordeterminingThereforeoveralloverstatedneverthelessdemonstratedseroprevalenceappearsraisingconcernsregardingwhethertechniquescandetectlevelstimeSerologyremainsbiologicaltoolchoiceimprovementstandardizationneededparticularlydeterminationEvaluation

Similar Articles

Cited By