检索规则说明:AND代表“并且”;OR代表“或者”;NOT代表“不包含”;(注意必须大写,运算符两边需空一格)
检 索 范 例 :范例一: (K=图书馆学 OR K=情报学) AND A=范并思 范例二:J=计算机应用与软件 AND (U=C++ OR U=Basic) NOT M=Visual
作 者:杨益[1] 杨玥涛[1] 石锋[1] 高春花[1] 汪俊云[1]
机构地区:[1]中国疾病预防控制中心寄生虫病预防控制所,卫生部寄生虫病原与媒介生物学重点实验室,国家级热带病国际联合研究中心,世界卫生组织热带病合作中心,上海200025
出 处:《中国寄生虫学与寄生虫病杂志》2016年第1期40-43,共4页Chinese Journal of Parasitology and Parasitic Diseases
摘 要:目的检测钩虫成虫抗原对钩虫病患者血清的反应性,以分析钩虫病患者血清中识别抗原组分的优势特异抗体类或亚类。方法以美洲钩虫成虫粗抗原为包被抗原,应用辣根过氧化物酶(HRP)标记的羊抗人抗体(不同类或亚类)作为检测试剂进行酶联免疫吸附试验(ELISA),分析比较钩虫病患者、健康人及其他寄生虫病患者的血清抗体的反应性。结果ELISA法分析显示,98份钩虫病患者血清含有特异抗体Ig M、Ig D、Ig E、Ig G、Ig G1、Ig G2、Ig G3和Ig G4的比例分别为41.84%、2.04%、1.02%、92.93%、19.39%、25.51%、17.35%和88.78%;而健康人和其他寄生虫病患者血清未检测到相应抗体的比例分别为77.61%、97.01%、92.54%、79.10%、95.52%、92.53%、92.53%和92.53%;若分别以这些特异抗体为检测靶,其诊断效能分别为56.36%、40.61%、38.18%、87.88%、50.30%、52.73%、47.88%和90.30%。Ig G4和Ig G作为检测靶分子的检测敏感性远高于Ig M、Ig D、Ig E及其他3种Ig G亚类(P<0.05)。Ig G4与Ig G之间检测的敏感性差异无统计学意义(χ2=1.61,P>0.05),Ig G4的特异性高于Ig G(χ2=4.97,P<0.05)。结论Ig G4抗体为美洲钩虫病患者(或感染者)血清中特异优势抗体。Objective To evaluate the reactivity of adult hookworm antigens to serum from patients with hookworm disease, and analyze in the serum class- or subclass-specific antibodies that show superior antigen recognition. Methods Sera from healthy participants, patients infected by Necator americanus and those with other parasitic infections were processed for ELISA, which used raw antigens extracted from adult worms of Necator americanus as the coating antigen, and different classes or subclasses of anti-human antibody labeled with HRP as the secondary antibody. The sensitivity and specificity of the assay with various secondary antibodies were compared.Results The ELISA using Ig M, Ig D,Ig E, Ig G, Ig G1, Ig G2, Ig G3, or Ig G4 as the secondary antibody showed a sensitivity of 41.84%, 2.04%, 1.02%, 92.93%, 19.39%, 25.51%, 17.35%, and 88.78%, respectively; specificity of77.61% 97.01%, 92.54%, 79.10%, 95.52%, 92.53%, 92.53%, and 92.53%, respectively; and diagnostic efficiency of 56.36%, 40.61%, 38.18%, 87.88%, 50.30%, 52.7%, 47.88%, and 90.30%, respectively. The sensitivity when using Ig G4 and Ig G as the secondary antibody had far exceeded that when using Ig M, Ig D, Ig E, and other three subclasses of Ig G(P〈0.05). There was no difference in sensitivity between tests using Ig G4 and Ig G(χ^2=1.61, P〉0.05). However, the test using Ig G4 revealed significantly higher specificity than that using Ig G(χ^2=4.97, P 〈0.05).Conclusion Use of Ig G4 as the enzyme-linked secondary antibody shows advantages in overall diagnostic efficiency over other classes/subclasses in ELISA.
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在链接到云南高校图书馆文献保障联盟下载...
云南高校图书馆联盟文献共享服务平台 版权所有©
您的IP:216.73.216.28