Skip directly to search Skip directly to A to Z list Skip directly to page options Skip directly to site content

NIOSHTIC-2 Publications Search

Search Results

Interlaboratory comparison of three multiplexed bead-based immunoassays for measuring serum antibodies to pneumococcal polysaccharides.

Authors
Whaley-MJ; Rose-C; Martinez-J; Laher-G; Sammons-DL; Smith-JP; Snawder-JE; Borrow-RB; Biagini-RE; Plikaytis-B; Carlone-GM; Romero-Steiner-S
Source
Clin Vaccin Immunol 2010 May; 17(5):862-869
NIOSHTIC No.
20036795
Abstract
Serotype-specific IgG, as quantified by a standardized WHO enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), is a serologic end point used to evaluate pneumococcal polysaccharide-based vaccine immunogenicity. Antibodies to each vaccine polysaccharide in licensed multivalent vaccines are quantified separately; this is laborious and consumes serum. We compared three bead-based immunoassays: a commercial assay (xMAP Pneumo14; Luminex) and two in-house assays (of the Health Protection Agency [HPA] and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [CDC]), using the WHO-recommended standard reference and reference sera (n /=/11) from vaccinated adults. Multiple comparisons of the IgG concentrations for seven conjugate vaccine serotypes were performed by sample (percent error), serotype (equivalency testing), and laboratory (concordance correlation coefficient [CCC]). When comparing concentrations by sample, bead-based immunoassays generally yielded higher antibody concentrations than the ELISA and had higher variability for serotypes 6B, 18C, and 23F. None of the three assays met the current WHO recommendation of 75% of sera falling within 40% of the assigned antibody concentrations for all seven serotypes. When compared by serotype, the CDC and HPA tests were equivalent for five of seven serotypes, whereas the Luminex assay was equivalent for four of seven serotypes. When overall mean IgG concentrations were compared by laboratory, a higher level of agreement (CCC close to 1) was found among bead-based immunoassays than between the assays and WHO assignments. When compared to WHO assignments, the HPA assay outperformed the other assays (r /=/ 0.920; CCC /=/ 0.894; coefficient of accuracy /=/ 0.972). Additional testing with sera from immunogenicity studies should demonstrate the applicability of this methodology for vaccine evaluation.
Keywords
Antibody-response; Antigens; Diagnostic-techniques; Immune-reaction; Immunology; Laboratory-techniques; Laboratory-testing; Standards; Statistical-analysis; Vaccines
Contact
Sandra Romero-Steiner, Vaccinology Laboratories, MVPD, DBD, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 1600 Clifton Road, Building 18, Room B-105, MS A-36, Atlanta, GA 30333
Publication Date
20100501
Document Type
Journal Article
Email Address
Ssteiner@cdc.gov
Fiscal Year
2010
NTIS Accession No.
NTIS Price
Issue of Publication
5
ISSN
1556-6811
NIOSH Division
DART
Source Name
Clinical and Vaccine Immunology
State
OH; GA
TOP