Efficiency of Seroiogic Tests in the Diagnosis of Systemic Candidiasis

Abstract

Candida antibody tests for systemic candidiasis were conducted on 53 sera from patients with the disease and 170 sera from control patients by agar gel diffusion, counterimmunoelectrophoresis (CIE), latex agglutination, and whole-cell agglutination. The agar gel diffusion test and CIE had sensitivity, specificity, and efficiency of approximately 90%. The whole-cell agglutination test scored significantly lower, whereas the latex test scored in between. The agar gel diffusion test had the highest reproducibility and the whole-cell agglutination test the lowest in tests of identical sera by six independent laboratories. The agar gel diffusion and CIE tests make significant contributions to the diagnosis of systemic candidiasis.

Diagnosis of invasive candidiasis by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay using the N-terminal fragment of Candida albicans hyphal wall protein 1

“…Sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values were calculated as described by Kozinn et al [19]. Mean values of relative absorbance of both groups were compared by the t test (Microsoft Excel), values of P < 0.05 were considered statistically significant.…”

Characterization of specific anti‐Candida IgM, IgA and IgE: diagnostic value in deep‐seated infections

“…The results in group I (systemic candidosis) and group I1 (colonized patients) were analysed with Kozinn's statistical method [40] (Table 2). Presence or absence of the three spec@ iJo6ypes in thejirst immunocapture-positive sample in groups I, 11, and 111 IgA was the isotype most frequently found in the first sera in group I (43/45, compared 11.…”

Evaluation of a Novel Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay To Detect Immunoglobulin G Antibody to Enolase for Serodiagnosis of Invasive Candidiasis

“…To avoid run-to-run variations, results were expressed as a relative absorbance index calculated by dividing the absorbance of the sample by the absorbance of a reference serum. The sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values were calculated as described by Kozinn et al (7). Mean values of relative absorbance of groups were compared by using the Student t test (Microsoft Excel); P values of Ͻ0.05 were considered statistically significant.…”