Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2017 Dec;55(12):3395-3404.
doi: 10.1128/JCM.01106-17. Epub 2017 Sep 27.

Evaluation of a New Immunochromatography Technology Test (LDBio Diagnostics) To Detect Toxoplasma IgG and IgM: Comparison with the Routine Architect Technique

Affiliations
Comparative Study

Evaluation of a New Immunochromatography Technology Test (LDBio Diagnostics) To Detect Toxoplasma IgG and IgM: Comparison with the Routine Architect Technique

Caroline Mahinc et al. J Clin Microbiol. 2017 Dec.

Abstract

A study comparing the ICT (immunochromatography technology) Toxoplasma IgG and IgM rapid diagnostic test (LDBio Diagnostics, France) with a fully automated system, Architect, was performed on samples from university hospitals of Marseille and Saint-Etienne. A total of 767 prospective sera and 235 selected sera were collected. The panels were selected to test various IgG and IgM parameters. The reference technique, Toxoplasma IgGII Western blot analysis (LDBio Diagnostics), was used to confirm the IgG results, and commercial kits Platelia Toxo IgM (Bio-Rad) and Toxo-ISAgA (bioMérieux) were used in Saint-Etienne and Marseille, respectively, as the IgM reference techniques. Sensitivity and specificity of the ICT and the Architect IgG assays were compared using a prospective panel. Sensitivity was 100% for the ICT test and 92.1% for Architect (cutoff at 1.6 IU/ml). The low-IgG-titer serum results confirmed that ICT sensitivity was superior to that of Architect. Specificity was 98.7% (ICT) and 99.8% (Architect IgG). The ICT test is also useful for detecting IgM without IgG and is both sensitive (100%) and specific (100%), as it can distinguish nonspecific IgM from specific Toxoplasma IgM. In comparison, IgM sensitivity and specificity on Architect are 96.1% and 99.6%, respectively (cutoff at 0.5 arbitrary units [AU]/ml). To conclude, this new test overcomes the limitations of automated screening techniques, which are not sensitive enough for IgG and lack specificity for IgM (rare IgM false-positive cases).

Keywords: Architect; Toxoplasma gondii; immunochromatography test; immunoglobulin G; immunoglobulin M; serology; toxoplasmosis.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

FIG 1
FIG 1
Distribution of nonselected IgG serum titers with Architect. The dark columns correspond to sera that are positive by ICT IgG-IgM (LDBIO Diagnostics). The gray columns correspond to sera that are negative by ICT IgG-IgM (LDBIO Diagnostics).
FIG 2
FIG 2
Toxoplasma IgGII Western blot (LDBIO Diagnostics) profiles. These profiles were obtained from 11 sera of the panel corresponding to nonspecific IgG on Architect with a negative ICT. C, control; C1, positive control with IgG of 5 UI/ml on Architect; C2, positive control with IgG of 1.2 UI/ml on Architect; C3, positive control of a confirmed seroconversion with IgG of 0.6 UI/ml on Architect; P, panel. Eleven sera were used: P1, IgG of 3.2 UI/ml on Architect, negative ICT, 2 bands (i.e., negative) with Toxo II IgG Western blot analysis; P2 to P4, IgG of 3.2 to 21.6 UI/ml on Architect, negative ICT, 1 band (i.e., negative) with Toxo II IgG Western blot analysis; P5 to P11, IgG of 3.8 to 6.7 UI/ml on Architect, negative ICT, 0 band (i.e., negative) with Toxo II IgG Western blot analysis; P6 to P10, not presented.

References

    1. Montoya J, Liesenfeld O. 2004. Toxoplasmosis. Lancet 363:1965–1976. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(04)16412-X. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Roberts A, Hedman K, Luyasu V, Zufferey J, Bessières MH, Blatz RM, Candolfi E, Decoster A, Enders G, Gross U, Guy E, Hayde M, Ho-Yen D, Johnson J, Lécolier B, Naessens A, Pelloux H, Thulliez P, Petersen E. 2001. Multicenter evaluation of strategies for serodiagnosis of primary infection with Toxoplasma gondii. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis Off Publ Eur Soc Clin Microbiol 20:467–474. doi: 10.1007/PL00011289. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Remington JS, Thulliez P, Montoya JG. 2004. Recent developments for diagnosis of toxoplasmosis. J Clin Microbiol 42:941–945. doi: 10.1128/JCM.42.3.941-945.2004. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Sensini A. 2006. Toxoplasma gondii infection in pregnancy: opportunities and pitfalls of serological diagnosis. Clin Microbiol Infect Off Publ Eur Soc Clin Microbiol Infect Dis 12:504–512. - PubMed
    1. Nogareda F, Le Strat Y, Villena I, De Valk H, Goulet V. 2014. Incidence and prevalence of Toxoplasma gondii infection in women in France, 1980-2020: model-based estimation. Epidemiol Infect 142:1661–1670. doi: 10.1017/S0950268813002756. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources