Abstract
A new passive hemagglutination assay for the detection of antibodies to rubella virus hemagglutinin (PHAST-Rubella) was compared with the hemagglutination inhibition (HI) test and another passive hemagglutination test that uses a soluble rubella virus antigen (SA-PHA). When the immune responses of vaccinated individuals were monitored, similar rises in antibody titer were detected by HI or PHAST-Rubella, whereas the rise in titer detected by SA-PHA was delayed. Early-phase vaccine-induced immunoglobulin M antibody analyzed by sucrose gradient fractionation was detected to the same degree by HI and PHAST-Rubella, but early-phase immunoglobulin G antibody reacted more strongly in the HI test. When acute and convalescent serum pairs from rubella-infected individuals were evaluated, a fourfold rise in titer was detected by PHAST-Rubella and HI in 15 of 15 pairs, whereas SA-PHA, which is not intended for detecting antibody titer rises in acute infections, detected a rise in titer in only 3 of 15 pairs. In studies to determine rubella immune status, testing of 1,078 premarital and random serum specimens resulted in 98.6% agreement among the three methods in identifying rubella antibody-positive and -negative individuals. For the quantitative PHAST-Rubella procedure, a coefficient of correlation of 0.93 was obtained, in comparison with HI, when a panel of 40 characterized sera were tested. These results indicate that PHAST-Rubella reagents can detect rubella antibodies as well as HI reagents and thus may be used as a fast and accurate means of determining rubella immune status and for the quantitation of rubella antibodies.
Full text
PDF
Selected References
These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
- Cremer N. E., Hagens S. J., Cossen C. K. Specificity of the passive hemagglutination test for antibody to rubella virus and the passive hemagglutination response after vaccination. J Clin Microbiol. 1981 Jan;13(1):226–227. doi: 10.1128/jcm.13.1.226-227.1981. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Haukenes G. Experience with an indirect (passive) haemagglutination test for the demonstration of rubella virus antibody. Acta Pathol Microbiol Scand B. 1980 Apr;88(2):85–87. doi: 10.1111/j.1699-0463.1980.tb02610.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Kilgore J. M. Clinical evaluation of a rubella passive hemagglutination test system. J Med Virol. 1979;3(3):231–236. doi: 10.1002/jmv.1890030309. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Meurman O. H. Antibody responses in patients with rubella infection determined by passive hemagglutination, hemagglutination inhibition, complement fixation, and solid-phase radioimmunoassay tests. Infect Immun. 1978 Feb;19(2):369–372. doi: 10.1128/iai.19.2.369-372.1978. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Shekarchi I. C., Sever J. L., Tzan N., Ley A., Ward L. C., Madden D. Comparison of hemagglutination inhibition test and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay for determining antibody to rubella virus. J Clin Microbiol. 1981 May;13(5):850–854. doi: 10.1128/jcm.13.5.850-854.1981. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Zartarian M. V., Friedly G., Peterson E. M., de la Maza L. M. Detection of rubella antibodies by hemagglutination inhibition, indirect fluorescent-antibody test, and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. J Clin Microbiol. 1981 Dec;14(6):640–645. doi: 10.1128/jcm.14.6.640-645.1981. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]