Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Journal of Clinical Microbiology logoLink to Journal of Clinical Microbiology
. 1981 Dec;14(6):640–645. doi: 10.1128/jcm.14.6.640-645.1981

Detection of rubella antibodies by hemagglutination inhibition, indirect fluorescent-antibody test, and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay.

M V Zartarian, G Friedly, E M Peterson, L M de la Maza
PMCID: PMC274013  PMID: 7037834

Abstract

Using hemagglutination inhibition (HAI) as a reference method, 292 (40 nonimmune, 252 immune) human serum samples were tested by indirect fluorescent antibody (IFA) and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) for immune status and quantitation of rubella antibodies. The overall agreement with HAI for immune status was 99.7% (291/292) with IFA and 98.6% (288/292) with ELISA. Two specimens (0.7%, 2/292), negative by HAI, were equivocal by ELISA. Initially a 6.5% (19/292) overall disagreement was obtained for immune status evaluation between HAI and IFA, which was reduced to 0.3% (1/292) upon repeat testing. All of these samples were near the immune/nonimmune cutoff point (95 samples), reflecting an initial disagreement of 20% (19/95) in this category (HAI titers less than 1:20). Likewise, an initial overall disagreement of 4.5% (13/292) was obtained between HAI and ELISA which was reduced to 0.7% (2/292) upon repeated testing. Eleven of the 13 samples were near the immune/nonimmune cutoff point, reflecting an initial disagreement of 11.6% (11/95) with sera having an HAI antibody titer of less than 1:20. Quantitation of rubella antibodies by IFA showed an overall correlation with HAI of 86.6% within less than twofold titer and 99.3% within less than fourfold titers. In testing the ability of ELISA to quantitate antibody, a correlation coefficient (r) of 0.996 was obtained by plotting the measured average optical density (405 nm) of ELISA against the corresponding log of HAI titer. Both IFA and ELISA showed good correlation with HAI for immune status evaluation and for quantitation of rubella antibodies. Technically the HAI was the most cumbersome to perform, whereas IFA was the least technically demanding. Originally, 308 samples were tested; 16 samples (5.2%) could not be evaluated by IFA because of a high level of nonspecific fluorescence. The strict requirement of controlling the temperature range (23 to 24 degrees C) during substrate hydrolysis proved to be a problem with the ELISA test in our laboratory.

Full text

PDF
640

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. BROWN G. C., MAASSAB H. F., VERONELLI J. A., FRANCIS T. J., Jr RUBELLA ANTIBODIES IN HUMAN SERUM: DETECTION BY THE INDIRECT FLUORESCENT ANTIBODY TECHNIC. Science. 1964 Aug 28;145(3635):943–945. doi: 10.1126/science.145.3635.943. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Bidwell D. E., Chantler S. M., Morgan-Capner P., Pattison J. R. Further investigation of the specificity and sensitivity of ELISA for rubella antibody screening. J Clin Pathol. 1980 Feb;33(2):200–201. doi: 10.1136/jcp.33.2.200-b. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Brody J. P., Binkley J. H., Harding S. A. Evaluation and comparison of two assays for detection of immunity to rubella infection. J Clin Microbiol. 1979 Nov;10(5):708–711. doi: 10.1128/jcm.10.5.708-711.1979. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Cleary T. J., Cid A., Ellis B., Malkus H., Noto T., Halbert S., Castro A. A direct enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) for detection of antibodies for rubella virus in human sera. Res Commun Chem Pathol Pharmacol. 1978 Feb;19(2):281–293. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Cremer N. E., Hagens S. J., Cossen C. Comparison of the hemagglutination inhibition test and an indirect fluorescent-antibody test for detection of antibody to rubella virus in human sera. J Clin Microbiol. 1980 Jun;11(6):746–747. doi: 10.1128/jcm.11.6.746-747.1980. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Garland S. M., Locarnini S. A., Gust I. D. A solid-phase enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) for detection of antibody to rubella virus. Pathology. 1979 Jul;11(3):393–399. doi: 10.3109/00313027909059017. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Haukenes G., Blom H. False positive rubella virus haemagglutination inhibition reactions: occurrence and disclosure. Med Microbiol Immunol. 1975;161(2):99–106. doi: 10.1007/BF02121750. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Morgan-Capner P., Pullen H. J., Pattison J. R., Bidwell D. E., Bartlett A., Voller A. A comparison of three tests for rubella antibody screening. J Clin Pathol. 1979 Jun;32(6):542–545. doi: 10.1136/jcp.32.6.542. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Schmidt N. J., Lennette E. H. Variables of the rubella hemagglutination-inhibition test system and their effect on antigen and antibody titers. Appl Microbiol. 1970 Mar;19(3):491–504. doi: 10.1128/am.19.3.491-504.1970. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Vejtorp M. Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay for determination of rubella IgG antibodies. Acta Pathol Microbiol Scand B. 1978 Dec;86B(6):387–392. doi: 10.1111/j.1699-0463.1978.tb00061.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Vestergaard B. F., Grauballe P. C. ELISA for herpes simplex virus (HSV) type-specific antibodies in human sera using HSV type 1 and type 2 polyspecific antigens blocked with type-heterologous rabbit antibodies. Acta Pathol Microbiol Scand B. 1979 Aug;87(4):261–263. doi: 10.1111/j.1699-0463.1979.tb02436.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Voller A., Bidwell D. E. A simple method for detecting antibodies to rubella. Br J Exp Pathol. 1975 Aug;56(4):338–339. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Journal of Clinical Microbiology are provided here courtesy of American Society for Microbiology (ASM)

RESOURCES