Comparison of real-time PCR and antigen assays for detection of hepatitis e virus in blood donors

52Citations
Citations of this article
59Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Hepatitis E virus (HEV) infection is recognized as an emerging and often undiagnosed disease in industrialized countries, with asymptomatic infections actually occurring in blood donors. Sensitive detection of HEV-RNA is crucial for diagnosis and monitoring of disease progression. We evaluated the analytical sensitivity and performance of three HEV RT-PCR assays (RealStar HEV reverse transcription-PCR [RT-PCR], hepatitis@ceeramTools, and ampliCube HEV RT-PCR) for screening of individuals for HEV infections (ID-nucleic acid amplification technology [ID-NAT]) and for blood donor pool screening (minipool-NAT [MP-NAT]). RNA was extracted using NucliSens easyMAG (ID-NAT) and a high-volume extraction protocol (4.8 ml, chemagic Viral 5K, MP-NAT). Three NAT assays were evaluated for ID-NAT but only two assays for MP-NAT due to inhibition of the ampliCube HEV RT-PCR kit using the corresponding RNA extract. Assays provided good analytical sensitivity, ranging from 37.8 to 180.1 IU/ml (ID-NAT) and from 4.7 to 91.2 IU/ml (MP-NAT). The applicability of HEV antigen (HEV-Ag) screening was compared to that of RT-PCR screening and detection of HEV-IgM antibodies using seroconversion panels of 10 HEV genotype 3-infected individuals. Four individuals revealed a positive HEV-Ag detection result, with corresponding viremias ranging from 1.92E +03 to 2.19E +05 IU/ml, while the progression of HEV-Ag followed that of HEV viremia. The other six individuals showed no presence of HEV-Ag although the corresponding viremias were also in the range of>1.0E +03. Anti-HEV-IgM antibodies were detectable in seven donors; one donor presented parallel positivities of HEV-Ag and anti-HEV IgM. The evaluated NAT methods present powerful tools providing sensitive HEV detection. Application of HEV-Ag or anti-HEV IgM screening is currently inferior for the early detection of HEV infection due to the decreased sensitivity compared to NAT methods. Copyright © 2014, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Vollmer, T., Knabbe, C., & Dreier, J. (2014). Comparison of real-time PCR and antigen assays for detection of hepatitis e virus in blood donors. Journal of Clinical Microbiology, 52(6), 2150–2156. https://doi.org/10.1128/JCM.03578-13

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free