Rapid diagnosis of Legionnaires' disease by urinary antigen detection

Sathapatayavongs, Boonmee; Köhler, Richard; Wheat, L. Joseph; White, A. Clinton; Winn, Washington C.; Girod, John C.; Edelstein, Paul H.

doi:10.1016/0002-9343(82)90451-x

Cited by 78 publications

(42 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…8 A dose-response curve determined using dilutions of control urine A is shown in the figure. The coefficients of variation (CV) calculated from quadruplicate samples of each dilution are shown in table 3." Also shown in the figure is a dose-response curve for control B; both curves seem to be parallel, although statistical confirmation was not attempted.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of urinary antigen ELISA for diagnosing Legionella pneumophila serogroup 1 infection.

Birtles¹,

Harrison²,

Samuel³

et al. 1990

J Clin Pathol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of urinary antigen ELISA for diagnosing Legionella pneumophila serogroup 1 infection.

Birtles¹,

Harrison²,

Samuel³

et al. 1990

J Clin Pathol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The data presented indicate that, at least for patients with lower respiratory tract infections, the specificity of the Biotest and ‘current assays’ is excellent, with no false‐positive results being found among the 123 non‐LD patients examined. Although not encountered in this study, it has been reported that some urine samples give false‐positive results, due to non‐specific reactions, which can be removed by boiling the sample prior to testing [5,18]. Although it is not a stated prerequisite in the manufacturer's instructions, it is noted that boiling samples does not interfere with the Biotest assay.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 86%

A multileft evaluation of the Biotest legionella urinary antigen EIA

Harrison

Uldum

Alexiou-Daniel

et al. 1998

Clinical Microbiology and Infection

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

OBJECTIVES: To undertake a multicenter study to evaluate the Biotest legionella urinary antigen enzyme immunoassay (EIA) performance against those EIAs already in use in 14 European laboratories. METHODS: Each laboratory examined urine specimens from appropriate patients using both their current assay and the Biotest EIA. Each examined: a standard panel of 12 coded urine samples (distributed by Biotest); a panel of 10 coded urine samples provided as part of a European external quality assurance (EQA) scheme; urine samples from patients with proven legionnaires' disease (LD); urine samples from patients with pneumonia of microbiologically proven cause other than LD; and urine samples submitted for routine examination. Thus, the performance of the Biotest assay (in comparison with current EIAs), its specificity and utility, and the inter-laboratory agreement were assessed. RESULTS: Inter-laboratory agreement was excellent, with all participants obtaining the expected results for 20 of 22 coded urine specimens. Specificity, determined using 123 specimens from patients with infections of known etiology, was 100%. The Biotest EIA gave positive results in 86% of specimens which had been positive in the laboratories' current EIAs, and in 94.6% of those specimens which were positive for Legionella pneumophila serogroup 1. CONCLUSION: The Biotest EIA is simple to use and specific and the results obtained in different laboratories show excellent agreement. The assay compares well existing EIAs, at least for L. pneumophila serogroup 1

show abstract

“…Urinary antigen testing to detect Legionella antigen has proven the most powerful diagnostic method (4,5,15,16,18,22,24), and the commercially available tests have been widely used. However, the main drawback to the available urinary antigen tests is that they only detect the soluble antigen of L. pneumophila serogroup 1 but do not efficiently detect L. pneumophila non-serogroup 1 and other Legionella species (2,12).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Over the intervening years, Legionella urinary antigen detection methods using the techniques of enzyme immunoassay (EIA) and radioimmunoassay have been extensively studied and have proven to be the most powerful diagnostic methods (4,5,18,22,24). The specificity for these tests has been reported to be 100%, and the sensitivity has been shown to vary between 70 and 100% (15).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Characterization of a Lipoprotein Common to Legionella Species as a Urinary Broad-Spectrum Antigen for Diagnosis of Legionnaires' Disease

Park¹,

Park²,

Chun

2003

J Clin Microbiol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We have previously identified the Legionella 19-kDa peptidoglycan-associated lipoprotein (PAL) as a speciescommon immunodominant antigen. We describe here for the first time the excretion and detection of the PAL antigen in infected urine specimens, which is useful for the diagnosis of Legionnaires' disease. Rabbit anti-PAL immunoglobulin G (IgG) antibody was produced by immunization with the purified, recombinant PAL of Legionella pneumophila serogroup 1 and used in the PAL antigen capture enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) to detect urinary PAL antigen. A soluble-antigen capture ELISA using rabbit IgG antibodies against Legionella soluble antigens was prepared independently and used as a broad-spectrum standard test to detect soluble antigens of several Legionella species. Urine samples were obtained from guinea pigs experimentally infected with each of L. pneumophila serogroups 1, 3, and 6, and other Legionella species. The absorbance values of the PAL antigen ELISA highly correlated with those of the soluble-antigen ELISA in infected urine samples, with a correlation coefficient of 0.84 (P < 0.01). When applied to 17 infected urine samples and 67 negative controls from guinea pigs, the sensitivity and specificity of the PAL antigen capture ELISA were 88.2 and 95.5%, respectively. Compared to the commercial Biotest enzyme immunoassay, the PAL antigen ELISA was more efficient for detecting pneumophila non-serogroup 1 and nonpneumophila species. None of the 161 control human urine specimens obtained from healthy adults and patients with either non-Legionella pneumonia or urinary tract infections tested positive in the PAL antigen ELISA. The present study shows that the Legionella PAL is a very useful broad-spectrum antigen for urinary diagnostic testing. Moreover, since recombinant PAL antigen can be produced more efficiently than the soluble antigens, the development of a broad-spectrum diagnostic immunoassay based on the detection of the PAL antigen appears to be warranted.

show abstract

Rapid diagnosis of Legionnaires' disease by urinary antigen detection

Cited by 78 publications

References 27 publications

Evaluation of urinary antigen ELISA for diagnosing Legionella pneumophila serogroup 1 infection.

Evaluation of urinary antigen ELISA for diagnosing Legionella pneumophila serogroup 1 infection.

A multileft evaluation of the Biotest legionella urinary antigen EIA

Characterization of a Lipoprotein Common to Legionella Species as a Urinary Broad-Spectrum Antigen for Diagnosis of Legionnaires' Disease

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About