4.7 Article

Comparison of three different serological techniques for primary diagnosis and monitoring of nasopharyngeal carcinoma in two age groups from Tunisia

期刊

JOURNAL OF MEDICAL VIROLOGY
卷 75, 期 4, 页码 593-602

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/jmv.20310

关键词

nasopharyngeal carcinoma; diagnosis; prognosis; antibodies; Epstein-Barr virus serology

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) in Tunisia is characterized by its bimodal age distribution involving juvenile patients of 10-24 years and adult patients of 40-60 years. Three serological techniques were compared for primary diagnosis (N = 117) and post-treatment monitoring (N = 21) of NPC patients separated in two age groups. Immunofluorescence assay (IFA) was used as the gold standard for detection of IgG and IgA antibodies reactive with Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) early (EA) and viral capsid (VCA) antigens. Results were compared with ELISA measuring IgG and IgA antibody reactivity to defined EBNA1, EA, and VCA antigens. Immunoblot was used to reveal the molecular diversity underlying the anti-EBV IgG and IgA antibody responses. The results indicate that young NPC patients have significantly more restricted anti-EBV IgG and IgA antibody responses with aberrant IgG VCA/EA levels in 78% compared to 91.7% in elder patients. IgA VCA/EA was detected in 50% of young patients versus 89.4% for the elder group (P< 0.001). Immunoblot revealed a reduced overall diversity of EBV antigen recognition for both IgG and IgA in young patients. A good concordance was observed between ELISA and IFA for primary NPC diagnosis with 81-91% overall agreement. Even better agreement (95-100%) was found for antibody changes during follow-up monitoring, showing declining reactivity in patients in remission and increasing reactivity in patients with persistent disease or relapse. ELISA for IgA anti-VCA-p18 and immunoblot proved most sensitive for predicting tumor relapse. VCA-p18 IgA ELISA seems suitable for routine diagnosis and early detection of NPC complication.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据