Table 2.
Characterization and confirmation of ZIKV infection among symptomatic and asymptomatic persons positive for ZIKV IgM, Myanmar, 2004–2017
| Source of samples | Year | Sample ID | Age | Sex | Days after onset of illness | P/N ratio (cutoff value = 2) | Flavi IgG titer | Neutralization titer (FRNT50) | Zika Real-time RT-PCR | Diagnostic interpretation | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Zika IgM | DENV IgM | JEV IgM | ZIKV | DENV-1 | DENV-2 | DENV-3 | DENV-4 | JEV | |||||||||
| Symptomatic patients | 2006 | M-101 | 4.5 | M | 7 | 21.6 | 4.9 | 3.7 | 55,419 | 40,960 | 2,560 | 1,280 | 1,280 | 2,560 | 320 | ++* | ZIKV† |
| 2013 | M-23 | 12 | M | 3 | 2.5 | 0.9 | 0.3 | 3,240 | 640 | 320 | 160 | < 80 | < 80 | < 80 | +++‡ | ZIKV | |
| 2013 | M-29 | 5 | M | 3 | 2.8 | 0.9 | 0.6 | 2,549 | 1,280 | < 80 | < 80 | < 80 | < 80 | < 80 | +++ | ZIKV | |
| 2013 | M-57 | 0.2 | F | 2 | 2.1 | 0.6 | 0.4 | 830 | 320 | 80 | 80 | 160 | 80 | < 80 | +++ | ZIKV | |
| 2013 | M-81 | 10 | F | 4 | 3.1 | 0.4 | 0.9 | 4,676 | 640 | < 80 | < 80 | < 80 | < 80 | < 80 | ++ | ZIKV | |
| 2013 | M-103 | 5.6 | F | 4 | 5.3 | 0.7 | 0.3 | 76,189 | 1,280 | 640 | 320 | < 80 | 160 | 160 | ++ | ZIKV | |
| 2013 | M-159 | 3 | M | 6 | 12.3 | 0.5 | 0.8 | 95 | 640 | < 80 | < 80 | < 80 | < 80 | < 80 | +++ | ZIKV | |
| 2013 | M-188 | 9 | M | 4 | 3.2 | 0.9 | 0.3 | 1,411 | 640 | < 80 | < 80 | 80 | < 80 | < 80 | +++ | ZIKV | |
| 2013 | M-257 | 9 | M | 5 | 3.7 | 0.5 | 0.3 | 5,888 | 1,280 | 160 | 80 | < 80 | < 80 | < 80 | +++ | ZIKV | |
| 2013 | M-289 | 12 | F | 7 | 21.3 | 4.3 | 1.1 | 305,644 | 40,960 | 10,240 | 80 | 10,240 | 160 | 160 | ++ | ZIKV | |
| 2013 | M-297 | 9 | M | 4 | 3.2 | 0.6 | 0.3 | 4,813 | 1,280 | < 80 | < 80 | < 80 | < 80 | < 80 | ++ | ZIKV | |
| 2015 | M-2 | 15 | F | 3 | 2.7 | 1.2 | 0.5 | 26,234 | 2,560 | 1,280 | 640 | 160 | 160 | < 80 | ++ | ZIKV | |
| 2015 | M-18 | 2.6 | F | 4 | 2.1 | 0.6 | 0.5 | 17,400 | 80 | 1,280 | 160 | 320 | 640 | 80 | +++ | ZIKV | |
| 2015 | M-43 | 10 | M | 7 | 12.1 | 2.3 | 0.3 | 8,026 | 5,120 | 320 | 320 | 80 | 320 | < 80 | +++ | ZIKV | |
| 2015 | M-56 | 6 | F | 1 | 2.4 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 8 | 80 | < 80 | < 80 | < 80 | < 80 | < 80 | +++ | ZIKV | |
| 2015 | M-75 | 9 | M | 4 | 15.8 | 3.0 | 0.5 | 53,928 | 20,480 | 5,120 | 2,560 | 640 | 640 | 160 | +++ | ZIKV | |
| 2015 | M-172 | 5.2 | M | 5 | 2.6 | 0.8 | 0.4 | 18,183 | 1,280 | 320 | 160 | < 80 | 160 | 80 | ++ | ZIKV | |
| 2015 | M-180 | 7 | M | 5 | 3.2 | 1.2 | 0.6 | 4,414 | 80 | 640 | 320 | 640 | 320 | 160 | +++ | ZIKV | |
| 2015 | M-200 | 3 | F | 4 | 8.6 | 3.3 | 1.0 | 74,966 | 5,120 | 1,280 | 1,280 | 2,560 | 2,560 | < 80 | +++ | ZIKV | |
| Asymptomatic persons | 2017 | HP-7 | 22 | M | – | 8 | 1.2 | 0.5 | 39,377 | 5,120 | 320 | 320 | 160 | 160 | < 80 | +++ | ZIKV |
| 2017 | HP-28 | 54 | M | – | 21.2 | 9.8 | 1.3 | 53,703 | 5,120 | 640 | 1,280 | 640 | 640 | 80 | +++ | ZIKV | |
| 2017 | HP-32 | 31 | M | – | 8.9 | 1.9 | 0.3 | 30,779 | 1,280 | 320 | 320 | 160 | 320 | 160 | +++ | ZIKV | |
| 2017 | HP-62 | 44 | M | – | 6.8 | 1.2 | 0.4 | 8,331 | 640 | 80 | 160 | 80 | < 80 | 80 | +++ | ZIKV | |
| 2017 | HP-77 | 31 | F | – | 22.1 | 6.4 | 0.7 | 39,650 | 2,560 | 160 | 320 | 160 | 80 | 80 | +++ | ZIKV | |
| 2017 | HP-78 | 18 | F | – | 2.5 | 1.0 | 0.3 | 34,303 | 640 | 320 | 320 | 320 | 160 | < 80 | +++ | ZIKV | |
| 2017 | HP-79 | 38 | F | – | 8.7 | 1.1 | 0.3 | 13,297 | 1,280 | 80 | 160 | 160 | 80 | 160 | +++ | ZIKV | |
DENV = dengue virus; ELISA = enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay; FRNT = focus reduction neutralization test; IgG = immunoglobulin G; IgM = immunoglobulin M; JEV = Japanese encephalitis virus; PCR = polymerase chain reaction; RT-PCR = reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction; WHO = World Health Organization; ZIKV = Zika virus.
++ means positive for ZIKV real-time PCR in two primer sets (Primer set 2 and 3).
ZIKV: Considering the WHO guidelines, infection due to ZIKV was based on the positive result for ZIKV real-time PCR in any of the three primer sets and further positive confirmation by ZIKV IgM ELISA. Neutralization titers of serum samples against the ZIKV, DENV, and JEV were also taken into consideration just if no clear-cut results would be obtained.