Measures of rabies immunity

Moore, Susan M.; Gordon, Chandra R.

doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-818705-0.00013-3

Cited by 3 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 66 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In RFFIT, an antibody level of 0.50 IU/ml or greater indicated seroconversion following vaccination [ 10 , 12 , 26 ]. Furthermore, a titer of 0.1 IU/ml corresponding to a complete neutralization at 1:5 serum dilutions in the RFFIT has also been reported [ 27 ]. A good correlation study is required for showing any alternative test (ELISA) regarding rabies vaccine seroprofiling in tested animal.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Serological profiling of rabies antibodies by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay and its comparative analysis with rapid fluorescent focus inhibition test in mouse model

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim: In this study, we have used enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) as an alternative test to replace the cumbersome rapid fluorescent focus inhibition test (RFFIT) to ascertain the immune status of immunized mice against rabies virus. Materials and Methods: Rabies is a devastating disease worldwide caused by rabies virus. Proper usage of pre- or post-exposure rabies vaccine can prevent the disease transmission. In this study, mice were immunized with Vero cell-adapted inactivated rabies vaccine. RFFIT was used as a test to determine the serum neutralizing titers in infected/vaccinated mice. Seroprofiling of mice sera was done in vitro by ELISA. Results: Twenty-one days post-immunization, both ELISA and RFFIT assays indicated similar antibody levels in mice sera that were immunized with Vero cell-adapted inactivated rabies vaccine. Both the tests were correlated, and the linearity was verified by the regression line (R2=0.979). Conclusion: In this study, we profiled the serological status of Vero cell-adapted inactivated rabies vaccine through ELISA in mice model that correlated well with the OIE gold standard test RFFIT.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Serological profiling of rabies antibodies by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay and its comparative analysis with rapid fluorescent focus inhibition test in mouse model

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Differences in rabies serology methods, performance characteristics, purpose of testing, etc. have been covered in previous publications, notably the difference measuring antibody function versus antibody binding [ 21 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 ]. SN methods have the advantage of providing an in vitro measurement of what occurs in vivo [ 41 , 42 , 43 ].…”

Section: Defining the Purpose Of Testing/context Of Interpretationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Challenges of Rabies Serology: Defining Context of Interpretation

Moore

2021

Viruses

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The case fatality rate of rabies, nearly 100%, is one of the most unique characteristic of this ancient virus infection. The crucial role rabies virus neutralizing antibody plays in protection is both well established and explanation of why rabies serology is important. Various laboratory methods can and have been used but serum neutralization methods have long been the gold standard due to the ability to measure function (neutralization), however these methods can be difficult to perform for several reasons. Assays such as enzyme linked absorbance assays (ELISA), indirect fluorescence antibody (IFA) and more recently lateral flow methods are in use. Interpretation of results can be problematic, not only between methods but also due to modifications of the same method that can lead to misinterpretations. A common assumption in review of laboratory test results is that different methods for the same component produce comparable results under all conditions or circumstances. Assumptions and misinterpretations provide the potential for detrimental decisions, ranging from regulatory to clinically related, and most importantly what ‘level’ is protective. Review of the common challenges in performance and interpretation of rabies serology and specific examples illuminate critical issues to consider when reviewing and applying results of rabies serological testing.

show abstract

“…Furthermore, indirect fluorescent antibody test is also a semi-quantitative test for rabies immunoglobulins detection where the presence of rabies Igs is assessed by a fluorescence signal, requiring as little as 1.5 h to obtain the result. However, a fluorescence microscope is needed (Messenger and Rupprecht 2015). In addition, RAPINA (rapid neutralizing antibody) test based on immunochromatography principle was proposed as a fast alternative method to detect the presence of neutralizing Abs in human serum samples (Shiota et al 2009).…”

Section: Antigen Binding Assaysmentioning

confidence: 99%

Detection and quantification of anti-rabies glycoprotein antibodies: current state and perspectives

Rodríguez

Fontana

Garay

et al. 2021

Appl Microbiol Biotechnol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Rabies is an ancient fatal disease with no other available treatment than post-exposure vaccination, where the bite of infected animals, mainly dogs, is the leading cause of its transmission to human beings. In this context, global vaccination campaigns of companion animals, as well as wildlife reservoirs vaccination, are key factors to achieve the "Zero by 30" plan that pursues the eradication of dog-mediated human rabies by 2030. Rabies virus-neutralizing antibodies (VNAs) play an essential role in the disease protection, as it correlates with an adequate immune response and allows evaluating pre-or post-exposure prophylaxis efficacy. Hence, counting with reliable, accurate, and robust serological tests is of paramount importance. Currently, RFFIT and FAVN are the gold standard VNAs tests recommended by both the WHO and the OIE. Despite these methodologies are efficient and widely used, they present several drawbacks, as they are less easily to standardize and require the use of live rabies virus, containment facilities, and skilled professionals. Thus, in this review, we describe the state-of-the-art of alternative analytical methodologies currently available for rabies serology, with novel approaches based on pseudotyped recombinant viruses and emphasizing in the antigen binding methodologies that detect and quantify antibodies against the rabies glycoprotein. We discussed the wide range of assays that are interesting tools for a faster measurement of anti-rabies glycoprotein antibodies and, in some cases, less complex and more versatile than the gold standard methods. Finally, we discussed the key issues during the design and optimization steps of ELISA assays, highlighting the importance of validation and standardization procedures to improve rabies serology tests and, as a consequence, their results. Key points• An exhaustive revision of rabies serology testing was made.• No rabies serology assay can be thought as better than others for all intents and purposes.• The validation procedure guarantees reliable and consistent results among the globe.

show abstract

Measures of rabies immunity

Cited by 3 publications

References 66 publications

Serological profiling of rabies antibodies by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay and its comparative analysis with rapid fluorescent focus inhibition test in mouse model

Serological profiling of rabies antibodies by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay and its comparative analysis with rapid fluorescent focus inhibition test in mouse model

Challenges of Rabies Serology: Defining Context of Interpretation

Detection and quantification of anti-rabies glycoprotein antibodies: current state and perspectives

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About