{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.04928861788617886, 'fraction_numerical': 0.03048780487804878, 'mean_word_length': 5.077160493827161, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Evaluation of Euroimmun Anti-Zika Virus IgM and IgG Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assays for Zika Virus Serologic Testing

ABSTRACT With the emerging Zika virus (ZIKV) epidemic, serologic diagnosis relies on a labor-intensive IgM antibody capture enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (MAC-ELISA) and confirmation by a plaque reduction neutralization test (PRNT). To streamline serologic testing, several commercial assays have been developed. Our aim was to compare the commercial Euroimmun anti-ZIKV IgM and IgG assays to the reference MAC-ELISA and PRNT currently in use. Serum specimens submitted to Public Health Ontario Laboratory, Canada, were tested for IgM and IgG using the Euroimmun assays and the results were compared with those from MAC-ELISA. The PRNT was performed on positive or equivocal specimens using either MAC-ELISA or Euroimmun assays, MAC-ELISA-inconclusive specimens, and a convenience sample of specimens negative by both assays (cohort 1). Another set of specimens selected on the basis of PRNT results was subsequently tested by the Euroimmun assays (cohort 2). MAC-ELISA was positive, equivocal, negative, and inconclusive in 57/223, 15/223, 147/223, and 4/223 specimens, respectively. Among the 76 specimens that were MAC-ELISA positive, equivocal, or inconclusive, 30 (39.5%) were Euroimmun IgM and/or IgG positive or equivocal. Among the 147 MAC-ELISA-negative specimens, 136 (92.5%) were Euroimmun IgM and IgG negative. The sensitivity of the combined Euroimmun IgM/IgG against the PRNT was 83% (cohort 1) and 92% (cohort 2), whereas the specificity was 81% (cohort 1) and 65% (cohort 2). The combined Euroimmun IgM/IgG showed good specificity (92.5%) but suboptimal sensitivity (39.5%) compared with that of the MAC-ELISA. However, the sensitivity of the combined Euroimmun IgM/IgG against the PRNT was significantly higher (83 to 92%). More studies are needed before commercial assays are implemented for routine ZIKV serologic diagnosis.