Performance of eight commercial immunoassays for the detection of cytomegalovirus-specific IgM antibodies in pregnancy - no test fits all needs.

Detection of cytomegalovirus (CMV)-specific immunoglobulin M (IgM) antibodies as first-line serologic diagnosis plays an important role in identifying CMV primary infection during pregnancy. The performance characteristics of eight commercially available CMV IgM assays were compared. Sensitivity and IgM antibody kinetics were assessed using 100 acute phase and follow-up sera from 39 pregnant women with a well-defined onset of CMV primary infection. Specificity was analyzed using 50 well-characterized serum samples from pregnant women not infected or latently infected with CMV and from patients with other acute infections. Until 12 weeks after the onset of primary infection, four assays showed sensitivities of 100%, whereas the others had individual gaps to detect all primary infections in this time period. All assays showed a time-dependent decrease of IgM levels. More than 12 weeks after the onset of infection, the IgM-positive rates varied considerably between tests. The specificity was between 92% and 98% in all but one assay. The observed differences in the performance characteristics must be taken into account in CMV screening and diagnosis of primary infection during pregnancy.

Low-level positive results in the Liaison CMV IgG II assay may misclassify pregnant woman as immune.

The aim of this study is to report on the specificity in the low-positive range of the Liaison CMV IgG II assay for determination of cytomegalovirus immune status in pregnancy. Sera with test results between 12.0 and 40.0 U/mL were retested with the Enzygnost Anti-CMV/IgG assay. Enzygnost-negative samples were analyzed by the Serion ELISA classic Cytomegalovirus IgG assay and, if positive or equivocal, also with the Mikrogen recomLine CMV IgG assay. A total of 12,117 sera were tested with the Liaison assay. Sixty sera were equivocal (12.0-13.9 U/mL), and 400 of 4295 positive sera were low-positive (14.0-40.0 U/mL). Based on consensus, at least 14% of the low-positives and 1.3% of all Liaison-positives can be considered as misclassified. The proportion of misclassified sera increased with lower Liaison IgG results. We suggest that the range for equivocal results in the Liaison assay should be revised.

Performance of the Elecsys Rubella IgG assay in the diagnostic laboratory setting for assessment of immune status.

Rubella in early pregnancy bears a high risk for congenital defects (e.g., cataracts, hearing loss, and heart disease) and for long-term sequelae in the newborn. Despite implementation of vaccination programs in many regions, the threat of devastating consequences from congenital rubella virus infection remains and careful screening of maternal immune status before and during pregnancy helps to reduce the risk. This study compared the performance of the Elecsys Rubella IgG assay with that of other assays routinely used for screening. Samples from 1,090 women undergoing routine antenatal care were tested using the Elecsys and Enzygnost Rubella IgG assays and the hemagglutination inhibition test. Samples with hemagglutination inhibition titers of <32 (n = 148) were additionally tested using the Vidas, AxSYM, Liaison, and Architect Rubella IgG assays. Agreement of qualitative results from the Elecsys, Enzygnost, and hemagglutination inhibition assays was good in all samples. All assays showed 100.0% specificity. In samples with hemagglutination inhibition titers of <32, the Elecsys, AxSYM, and Enzygnost assays showed higher sensitivity (>90.0%) than the other immunoassays (78.6 to 82.4%). The Elecsys assay reported significantly higher rubella virus IgG levels than the other immunoassays across the whole set of 1,090 samples, with the largest bias and deviation from limits of agreement in Bland-Altman analysis. In conclusion, the Elecsys assay is highly sensitive and specific with regard to qualitative results and suitable for routine automated screening. However, given the considerable variation between quantitative results from different immunoassays, testing methods should be documented and the same assay used throughout an individual's antenatal follow-up wherever possible.

Diagnosis of recent primary rubella virus infections: significance of glycoprotein-based IgM serology, IgG avidity and immunoblot analysis.

Reliable serodiagnosis of rubella virus (RV) infections requires discrimination of specific IgM induced by primary rubella from persistent, reactivated or non-specific IgM reactivity. Sera from 130 pregnant women with recent or past RV infection/vaccination, persistent IgM or negative rubella serology, 26 patients with other acute infections and 5 patients with rheumatoid factor-positivity were analyzed for RV-specific IgM by ELISA coated with whole-virus lysate or native glycoprotein, followed by determination of IgG avidity and E2-specific IgG using lysate-coated ELISA and non-reducing immunoblot. Compared to a reference µ-capture IgM ELISA, the sensitivity for diagnosing recent rubella infection/vaccination was 90.0% and 100% for the lysate-based and glycoprotein-based IgM ELISA, respectively. With respect to women with past RV infections or negative histories of RV infection/vaccination, both assays were 97.5-100% specific, whereas for patients with other acute infections the glycoprotein substrate provided a specificity of 92.3% compared to only 80.8% using whole-virus antigen. Analyzing anti-RV IgG avidity and anti-E2 IgG reactivity allowed the time point of primary infection to be determined unambiguously in >86% of samples. In conclusion, using RV glycoprotein antigen improves the specificity of indirect IgM ELISA. In cases of RV-specific IgM reactivity, recent primary rubella infection can be confirmed or excluded efficiently by specific IgG avidity and immunoblot analysis.