Performance Characteristics of Six Immunoglobulin M Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assays Used for Laboratory Confirmation of Measles.

Laboratory confirmation of infection is an essential component of measles surveillance. Detection of measles-specific IgM in serum by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) is the most common method used to confirm measles infection. ELISA formats vary, as does the sensitivity and specificity of each assay. Specimens collected within 3 days of rash onset can yield a false-negative result, which can delay confirmation of measles cases. Interfering substances can yield a false-positive result, leading to unnecessary public health interventions. The IgM capture assay developed at the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) was compared against five commercially available ELISA kits for the ability to detect measles virus-specific IgM in a panel of 90 well-characterized specimens. Serum samples were tested in triplicate using each commercial kit as recommended by the manufacturer. Using the CDC measles IgM capture assay as the reference test; the sensitivity and specificity for each commercial kit ranged from 50 to 83% and 86.9 to 98%, respectively. Discrepant results were observed for samples tested with all five commercial kits and ranged from 13.8 to 28.8% of the specimens tested. False-positive results occurred in 2.0 to 13.1% of sera, while negative results were observed in 16.7 to 50% of sera that were positive by the CDC measles IgM capture assay. Evaluation and interpretation of measles IgM serologic results can be complex, particularly in measles elimination settings. The performance characteristics of a measles IgM assay should be carefully considered when selecting an assay to achieve high-quality measles surveillance.

Qualitative Variation among Commercial Immunoassays for Detection of Measles-Specific IgG.

Measurement of measles virus-specific IgG is used to assess presumptive evidence of immunity among immunocompetent individuals with uncertain immune or vaccination status. False-negative test results may lead to unnecessary quarantine and exclusion from activities such as employment, education, and travel or result in unnecessary revaccination. In contrast, false-positive results may fail to identify susceptible individuals and promote spread of disease by those who are exposed and unprotected. To better understand the performance characteristics of tests to detect measles IgG, we compared five widely used, commercially available measles IgG test platforms using a set of 223 well-characterized serum samples. Measles virus neutralizing antibodies were also measured by in vitro plaque reduction neutralization, the gold standard method, and compared to IgG test results. Discrepant results were observed for samples in the low-positive ranges of the most sensitive tests, but there was good agreement across platforms for IgG-negative sera and for samples with intermediate to high levels of IgG. False-negative test results occurred in approximately 11% of sera, which had low levels of neutralizing antibody.