4.6 Article

An evaluation of the RIDASCREEN and IDEIA enzyme immunoassays and the RIDAQUICK immunochromatographic test for the detection of norovirus in faecal specimens

Journal

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL VIROLOGY
Volume 49, Issue 4, Pages 254-257

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jcv.2010.08.004

Keywords

Norovirus; ELISA; Immunochromatographic; Sensitivity; Specificity

Categories

Funding

  1. Brazilian CNPq [476841/2006-2]
  2. University of Liverpool
  3. Liverpool University

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: The detection of norovirus by ELISA and immunochromatographic methods may facilitate epidemiological studies into the global disease burden associated with norovirus gastroenteritis and provide a quick method of testing for norovirus infection. Objectives: To evaluate the new RIDASCREEN norovirus ELISA (3rd generation) and RIDAQUICK norovirus immunochromatographic test on a collection of samples from Brazilian children with acute gastroenteritis, and compare them against the established 2nd generation IDEIA norovirus assay. Study design: Reverse transcriptase PCR, the study reference standard, was used to test 726 specimens for the presence of norovirus. All 96 norovirus positive samples and a systematic selection of negative samples were tested by RIDASCREEN, RIDAQUICK and IDEIA norovirus tests. Results: The sensitivity of RIDASCREEN for the detection of norovirus was 63% (95% CI: 53-72%) and RIDAQUICK 69% (95% CI: 58-78%); both were >98% specific. The IDEIA had a sensitivity of 45% (95% CI: 35-55%), significantly lower than RIDASCREEN and RIDAQUICK (p <= 0.01). The sensitivity of RIDASCREEN and RIDAQUICK in detecting GII.4 noroviruses, the principal norovirus strain identified in community and nosocomial infection globally, was 78% and 88% respectively. Conclusion: The norovirus RIDASCREEN test may be useful in epidemiological studies of norovirus infection and the norovirus RIDAQUICK test offers an accurate and rapid method of detecting norovirus infection. (C) 2010 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available