Sensitivities of Radioimmunoassay and Enzyme‐Linked Immunosorbent Assay for Detection of Hepatitis B Surface Antigen

Abstract

Radioimmunoassay (RIA) using Austria II (Abbott) was found to be more sensitive for the detection of HBsAg than the Hepanostika Micro-Elisa system (Organon Teknika), by a factor of 5- to 20-fold for subtype 'ad' (with one exception), and 2- to 5-fold for subtype 'ay'. The sensitivities of RIA and the enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (Elisa) have also been evaluated in the screening of 178 selected serum samples contributed by 7 different laboratories. Of these, 149 were found to be positive for HBsAg by RIA, 142 were positive by Elisa and 36 were positive by CEP.

Comparison of enzyme immunoassay with radioimmunoassay for the detection of hepatitis B surface antigen

“…In one such study, EIA was found to have a sensitivity comparable with RIA and a false positive rate of 2-2-3.7% which could be reduced to 0.3-1.2% by confirmatory tests for positive sera (Kacaki et al, 1978). In another study, Hepanostika EIA was 2-20 times less sensitive than Ausria I1 RIA and gave a false negative rate of 4% (Hyland et al, 1979). A similar study found comparable sensitivity between the two methods and a false positive rate of 0.48% (Hopkins et al, 1978).…”

“…EIA techniques have been applied successfully to the detection of various antibodies and antigens (Wisdom, 1976) including HBsAg (Wolters et al, 1976;Halbert and Anken, 1977;Wei et al, 1977). EIA kits for HBsAg testing have become available commercially and have been compared with RIA (Hopkins et al, 1978;Kacaki et al, 1978;Hyland et al, 1979;Haas and Hotz, 1980). These studies compared a direct EIA, (Hepanostika@, Organon, Teknika), with RIA (Ausria II@, Abbott Laboratories) in tests with serum panels obtained in Europe and Australia.…”

Comparison of Six ‘Third-Generation’ Tests for the Detection of HBsAg

“…Others have also found the Hepanostika to be less sensitive than the RIA [1,2]. The instruc tions of the manufacturer for the calculation of the cutoff values should be clearer.…”