Article ID Journal Published Year Pages File Type
6134091 Journal of Virological Methods 2013 7 Pages PDF
Abstract
The microneutralization assay is the standard method to investigate immune responses to influenza vaccination. However there remains some uncertainty as to whether ELISA results are a true measure of immunity in healthy or immuno-compromised vaccines. Furthermore it has been questioned if antibodies against native (“folded”) and against denaturated (“unfolded”) viral glycoproteins can equally be used as a marker of protection. In this study, two different quantitative IgG-ELISA assays detecting (i) antibodies against unfolded recombinant hemagglutinin (HA) (r-ELISA) and (ii) antibodies against the native HA on the influenza virus surface captured by fetuin-linkage (f-ELISA) were compared to microneutralization titers in sera from 29 healthy vaccinees (n = 87 sera) and 39 kidney transplant recipients (n = 117 sera) collected before, three weeks after and six months after vaccination against influenza A (H1N1) 2009. With both ELISAs a significant increase in antibody levels was detected after vaccination and linear regression analysis demonstrated that r-ELISA and f-ELISA correlated with microneutralization (R = 0.622 for r-ELISA vs. R = 0.56 for f-ELISA). For the healthy vaccinees both ELISAs were found to be adequate to distinguish protected from non-protected individuals (sensitivity and specificity: 87.5%/85.3% for r-ELISA and 87.5%/88.3% for f-ELISA). Results from the transplant recipients showed a slightly reduced sensitivity of 73.3% for r-ELISA while the f-ELISA demonstrated similar sensitivity and specificity as in the healthy vaccinees. However, in order to obtain these assay performances the cut-off-values for protection had to be adjusted for both assays and both investigation cohorts respectively limiting their application in routine laboratories.
Related Topics
Life Sciences Immunology and Microbiology Virology
Authors
, , , ,