2011
DOI: 10.1016/j.diagmicrobio.2011.04.002
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Comparison of an ELISA and two reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction methods for norovirus detection

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
17
0
1

Year Published

2012
2012
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
6
2
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 36 publications
(18 citation statements)
references
References 18 publications
0
17
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Our results showed that Nano-85 could detect the current pandemic GII.4 norovirus virions in clinical stool specimens from patients with sporadic gastroenteritis using a sandwich ELISA format, although the detection rate was low. On the other hand, most ELISA detection kits currently are used for screening outbreak specimens and have low detection rates with sporadic specimens (18,(39)(40)(41). Therefore, these results showed that Nano-85 might function as a valuable reagent in a diagnostic detection kit, although we acknowledge that additional ELISA formats will need to be tested in order to improve the detection rate.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 95%
“…Our results showed that Nano-85 could detect the current pandemic GII.4 norovirus virions in clinical stool specimens from patients with sporadic gastroenteritis using a sandwich ELISA format, although the detection rate was low. On the other hand, most ELISA detection kits currently are used for screening outbreak specimens and have low detection rates with sporadic specimens (18,(39)(40)(41). Therefore, these results showed that Nano-85 might function as a valuable reagent in a diagnostic detection kit, although we acknowledge that additional ELISA formats will need to be tested in order to improve the detection rate.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 95%
“…The lack of broad reactivity by antibodies to human NoV strains has been well documented (Burton-MacLeod et al, 2004;Shiota et al, 2007), and for this reason, enzyme immunoassays display poor sensitivity (Costantini et al, 2010;Kele et al, 2011). Other candidate NoV ligands have been explored, such as putative NoV infection co-factors known as histo-blood group antigens (HBGAs) (Cannon and Vinjé, 2008;Harrington et al, 2004) and porcine gastric mucin, which contains some HBGAs (Pan et al, 2012;Tian et al, 2008); peptides (Rogers et al, 2013); and single chain antibodies (Huang et al, 2014).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…Current approaches for detecting norovirus in clinical and environmental samples utilize a combination of electron microscopy techniques [20][21][22][23][24], molecular detection assays [7,10,17,[25][26][27] and immunological methods [25,[28][29][30][31][32][33]. Each approach strives for maximizing sensitivity and specificity while minimizing the time for detection [34].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…ELISAs can analyze a myriad of pathological samples using multiple screening modes and reporter molecules, giving the assay broad versatility, but their need for high viral loads [5,27,30] limits the assays' application mostly in clinical settings. Despite their relatively lower sensitivity when compared to PCR-based methods [5,20], ELISA-based assays have been used to detect norovirus in human stool samples [5,25,[36][37][38][39][40][41][42][43], human sera [29], and food samples [26,31,32,44,45] Using norovirus GI.1 (Norwalk) virus-like particles (VLPs) as a model viral system, the objective of this study was to develop and evaluate several ELISA-based assays for rapid detection of varying concentrations of GI.1 VLPs (0.037-3.7 μg/mL). HuNoV VLPs are replication-incompetent, macromolecular protein assemblies with capsid structures and antigenic properties resembling those of innate norovirus particles [46][47][48].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%