Establishment of a novel diagnostic test algorithm for human T-cell leukemia virus type 1 infection with line immunoassay replacement of western blotting: a collaborative study for performance evaluation of diagnostic assays in Japan.
Algorithms
Antibodies, Viral
/ blood
Blotting, Western
Diagnostic Tests, Routine
/ methods
HTLV-I Antigens
/ immunology
HTLV-I Infections
/ diagnosis
Human T-lymphotropic virus 1
/ immunology
Humans
Immunoassay
Japan
Polymerase Chain Reaction
Proviruses
/ genetics
Reagent Kits, Diagnostic
Reproducibility of Results
Sensitivity and Specificity
Confirmatory test
Diagnostic algorithm
HTLV-1 antibody
HTLV-1 infection
LIA
PCR
WB
Journal
Retrovirology
ISSN: 1742-4690
Titre abrégé: Retrovirology
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101216893
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
24 08 2020
24 08 2020
Historique:
received:
26
02
2020
accepted:
12
08
2020
entrez:
25
8
2020
pubmed:
25
8
2020
medline:
25
6
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The reliable diagnosis of human T-cell leukemia virus type 1 (HTLV-1) infection is important, particularly as it can be vertically transmitted by breast feeding mothers to their infants. However, current diagnosis in Japan requires a confirmatory western blot (WB) test after screening/primary testing for HTLV-1 antibodies, but this test often gives indeterminate results. Thus, this collaborative study evaluated the reliability of diagnostic assays for HTLV-1 infection, including a WB-based one, along with line immunoassay (LIA) as an alternative to WB for confirmatory testing. Using peripheral blood samples from blood donors and pregnant women previously serologically screened and subjected to WB analysis, we analyzed the performances of 10 HTLV-1 antibody assay kits commercially available in Japan. No marked differences in the performances of eight of the screening kits were apparent. However, LIA determined most of the WB-indeterminate samples to be conclusively positive or negative (an 88.0% detection rate). When we also compared the sensitivity to HTLV-1 envelope gp21 with that of other antigens by LIA, the sensitivity to gp21 was the strongest. When we also compared the sensitivity to envelope gp46 by LIA with that of WB, LIA showed stronger sensitivity to gp46 than WB did. These findings indicate that LIA is an alternative confirmatory test to WB analysis without gp21. Therefore, we established a novel diagnostic test algorithm for HTLV-1 infection in Japan, including both the performance of a confirmatory test where LIA replaced WB on primary test-reactive samples and an additional decision based on a standardized nucleic acid detection step (polymerase chain reaction, PCR) on the confirmatory test-indeterminate samples. The final assessment of the clinical usefulness of this algorithm involved performing WB analysis, LIA, and/or PCR in parallel for confirmatory testing of known reactive samples serologically screened at clinical laboratories. Consequently, LIA followed by PCR (LIA/PCR), but neither WB/PCR nor PCR/LIA, was found to be the most reliable diagnostic algorithm. Because the above results show that our novel algorithm is clinically useful, we propose that it is recommended for solving the aforementioned WB-associated reliability issues and for providing a more rapid and precise diagnosis of HTLV-1 infection.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
The reliable diagnosis of human T-cell leukemia virus type 1 (HTLV-1) infection is important, particularly as it can be vertically transmitted by breast feeding mothers to their infants. However, current diagnosis in Japan requires a confirmatory western blot (WB) test after screening/primary testing for HTLV-1 antibodies, but this test often gives indeterminate results. Thus, this collaborative study evaluated the reliability of diagnostic assays for HTLV-1 infection, including a WB-based one, along with line immunoassay (LIA) as an alternative to WB for confirmatory testing.
RESULTS
Using peripheral blood samples from blood donors and pregnant women previously serologically screened and subjected to WB analysis, we analyzed the performances of 10 HTLV-1 antibody assay kits commercially available in Japan. No marked differences in the performances of eight of the screening kits were apparent. However, LIA determined most of the WB-indeterminate samples to be conclusively positive or negative (an 88.0% detection rate). When we also compared the sensitivity to HTLV-1 envelope gp21 with that of other antigens by LIA, the sensitivity to gp21 was the strongest. When we also compared the sensitivity to envelope gp46 by LIA with that of WB, LIA showed stronger sensitivity to gp46 than WB did. These findings indicate that LIA is an alternative confirmatory test to WB analysis without gp21. Therefore, we established a novel diagnostic test algorithm for HTLV-1 infection in Japan, including both the performance of a confirmatory test where LIA replaced WB on primary test-reactive samples and an additional decision based on a standardized nucleic acid detection step (polymerase chain reaction, PCR) on the confirmatory test-indeterminate samples. The final assessment of the clinical usefulness of this algorithm involved performing WB analysis, LIA, and/or PCR in parallel for confirmatory testing of known reactive samples serologically screened at clinical laboratories. Consequently, LIA followed by PCR (LIA/PCR), but neither WB/PCR nor PCR/LIA, was found to be the most reliable diagnostic algorithm.
CONCLUSIONS
Because the above results show that our novel algorithm is clinically useful, we propose that it is recommended for solving the aforementioned WB-associated reliability issues and for providing a more rapid and precise diagnosis of HTLV-1 infection.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32831150
doi: 10.1186/s12977-020-00534-0
pii: 10.1186/s12977-020-00534-0
pmc: PMC7444053
doi:
Substances chimiques
Antibodies, Viral
0
HTLV-I Antigens
0
Reagent Kits, Diagnostic
0
Types de publication
Evaluation Study
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
26Références
Clin Lab. 2017 Feb 1;63(2):227-233
pubmed: 28182361
J Infect Dis. 1999 Sep;180(3):685-94
pubmed: 10438355
Ann Neurol. 1993 Apr;33(4):392-6
pubmed: 8489210
J Clin Virol. 2009 Mar;44(3):185-9
pubmed: 19188090
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1981 Oct;78(10):6476-80
pubmed: 7031654
Blood. 2005 Oct 1;106(7):2462-71
pubmed: 15956280
Transfusion. 1999 Oct;39(10):1145-9
pubmed: 10532611
Pediatr Infect Dis J. 2013 Feb;32(2):175-7
pubmed: 23328821
Blood. 1991 Feb 15;77(4):896-905
pubmed: 1993227
J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2014 Sep;27(13):1392-3
pubmed: 24102288
J Clin Microbiol. 2017 Sep;55(9):2838-2849
pubmed: 28701419
AIDS Res Hum Retroviruses. 2015 May;31(5):543-9
pubmed: 25464979
Expert Rev Clin Immunol. 2014 Nov;10(11):1531-46
pubmed: 25340428
Lancet. 1986 May 3;1(8488):1031-2
pubmed: 2871307
Vox Sang. 1984;46(5):245-53
pubmed: 6328765
Microbiol Immunol. 2018 Oct;62(10):673-676
pubmed: 30125970
Jpn J Cancer Res. 1985 Jun;76(6):481-7
pubmed: 2991061
J Med Virol. 2008 Mar;80(3):484-93
pubmed: 18205214
J Clin Microbiol. 1992 Oct;30(10):2555-9
pubmed: 1400953
Cancer Sci. 2010 Nov;101(11):2361-7
pubmed: 20874852
Jpn J Cancer Res. 1993 Dec;84(12):1265-7
pubmed: 8294217
Lancet. 1992 May 2;339(8801):1110
pubmed: 1349119
Biochem Biophys Res Commun. 2001 Nov 23;289(1):1-6
pubmed: 11708767
Transfusion. 1990 Jul-Aug;30(6):491-4
pubmed: 1974089
Front Microbiol. 2012 Nov 15;3:388
pubmed: 23162541
J Clin Microbiol. 2019 Dec 23;58(1):
pubmed: 31597749
J Clin Microbiol. 2015 Nov;53(11):3485-91
pubmed: 26292315
Blood. 1977 Sep;50(3):481-92
pubmed: 301762
Transfusion. 2002 Jun;42(6):780-91
pubmed: 12147033
J Clin Lab Anal. 2019 Jul;33(6):e22909
pubmed: 31059152
Antiviral Res. 2017 Jan;137:41-48
pubmed: 27840202
J Clin Microbiol. 2015 Feb;53(2):587-96
pubmed: 25502533
Microbiol Immunol. 2019 Nov;63(11):458-464
pubmed: 31429972
J Clin Microbiol. 1999 May;37(5):1324-8
pubmed: 10203479
J Infect Dis. 1997 Aug;176(2):505-9
pubmed: 9237719
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1980 Dec;77(12):7415-9
pubmed: 6261256
Wkly Epidemiol Rec. 1990 Sep 14;65(37):281-3
pubmed: 2206928
AIDS Res Hum Retroviruses. 2011 Feb;27(2):131-5
pubmed: 20929385
Clin Diagn Lab Immunol. 1998 Jan;5(1):45-9
pubmed: 9455879
J Med Virol. 2012 Feb;84(2):327-35
pubmed: 22170555
J Clin Virol. 2011 Sep;52(1):38-44
pubmed: 21704554
J Virol. 1992 Feb;66(2):906-13
pubmed: 1530980
Lancet Infect Dis. 2016 Nov;16(11):1246-1254
pubmed: 27567105