Ralf Ignatius, Christiane Berg, Chris Weiland, Angela Darmer, Thilo Wenzel, Marion Lorenz, Jörg Fuhrmann, Michael Müller
{"title":"Accurate Detection of <i>Helicobacter pylori</i> Antigen in Human Stool Specimens by Two Novel Immunoassays.","authors":"Ralf Ignatius, Christiane Berg, Chris Weiland, Angela Darmer, Thilo Wenzel, Marion Lorenz, Jörg Fuhrmann, Michael Müller","doi":"10.1556/1886.2019.00008","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Stool antigen tests are recommended for the diagnosis of <i>Helicobacter pylori</i> infection. Here, we compared two novel assays, i.e., one enzyme immunoassay (EIA) and one immunochromatography assay (ICA), with a chemiluminescence immunoassay (CLIA) that had previously been compared with rapid urease test, histology, and urea breath test. Two hundred sixty-six frozen stool samples with defined CLIA results (42 positives, 219 negatives, and 5 samples with borderline results) collected between January and May 2018 were thawed and immediately tested by EIA, ICA, and CLIA. In 248 samples with repeatedly positive/negative CLIA results, EIA and ICA were positive for 40 and 37 of 41 CLIA-positive samples and yielded negative results for 206 and 201 of 207 CLIA-negative samples, respectively. There was a high positive percent agreement (EIA, 97.6%; 95% confidence interval (95% CI), 86.3-100%; ICA, 90.2%; 95% CI, 76.9-96.7%), as well as a negative percent agreement between the assays (EIA, 99.5%; 95% CI, 97.0-100%; ICA, 97.1%; 95% CI, 93.7-98.8%). This was further supported by kappa values indicating very good agreement (CLIA vs. EIA, 0.971; CLIA vs. ICA, 0.857). In conclusion, both EIA and ICA comprise valuable assays for the detection of <i>H. pylori</i> antigen in stool samples.</p>","PeriodicalId":11929,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Microbiology & Immunology","volume":"9 2","pages":"29-31"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-05-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1556/1886.2019.00008","citationCount":"5","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Microbiology & Immunology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1556/1886.2019.00008","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2019/6/3 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5
Abstract
Stool antigen tests are recommended for the diagnosis of Helicobacter pylori infection. Here, we compared two novel assays, i.e., one enzyme immunoassay (EIA) and one immunochromatography assay (ICA), with a chemiluminescence immunoassay (CLIA) that had previously been compared with rapid urease test, histology, and urea breath test. Two hundred sixty-six frozen stool samples with defined CLIA results (42 positives, 219 negatives, and 5 samples with borderline results) collected between January and May 2018 were thawed and immediately tested by EIA, ICA, and CLIA. In 248 samples with repeatedly positive/negative CLIA results, EIA and ICA were positive for 40 and 37 of 41 CLIA-positive samples and yielded negative results for 206 and 201 of 207 CLIA-negative samples, respectively. There was a high positive percent agreement (EIA, 97.6%; 95% confidence interval (95% CI), 86.3-100%; ICA, 90.2%; 95% CI, 76.9-96.7%), as well as a negative percent agreement between the assays (EIA, 99.5%; 95% CI, 97.0-100%; ICA, 97.1%; 95% CI, 93.7-98.8%). This was further supported by kappa values indicating very good agreement (CLIA vs. EIA, 0.971; CLIA vs. ICA, 0.857). In conclusion, both EIA and ICA comprise valuable assays for the detection of H. pylori antigen in stool samples.