Determination of the Accuracy and Optimal Cut-Off Point for ELISA Test in Diagnosis of Human Brucellosis in Iran

  • Mehrdad Hasibi Mail Department of Infectious Diseases, Amir Alam Hospital, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
  • Sirus Jafari Department of Infectious Diseases, Imam Khomeini Hospital, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
  • Habibollah Mortazavi Department of Infectious Diseases, Imam Khomeini Hospital, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
  • Marjan Asadollahi Department of Neurology, Loghman Hospital, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
  • Gholamreza Esmaeeli Djavid Department of Infectious Diseases, Imam Khomeini Hospital, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Keywords:
Brucellosis, Brucellosis diagnosis, Elisa, Sensitivity, Specificity

Abstract

In endemic area the most challenging problem for brucellosis is to find a reliable diagnostic method. In this case-control study, we investigated the accuracy of ELISA test for diagnosis of human brucellosis and determined the optimal cut-off value for ELISA results in Iran. The laboratory diagnosis of brucellosis was performed by blood isolation of Brucella organism with a BACTEC 9240 system and/or detection of Brucella antibodies by standard agglutination test (titer ≥ 1:160). Serum level of ELISA IgG and ELISA IgM from 56 confirmed cases of brucellosis and 126 controls were compared with each other by Box plot graph and Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curve. Box plot graphs showed the high degree of dispersion for IgG and IgM data in patients compared with all controls. We observed partially overlapping for IgM data (not for IgG) between cases and controls in graphs. The area under ROC curve for distinguishing between cases and controls was larger for IgG compared to IgM. Based on results of this study, ELISA IgG test was more reliable than ELISA IgM test in diagnosis of human brucellosis in Iran. Using a cut-off of 10 IU/ml and 50 IU/ml had most sensitivity (92.9%) and most specificity (100%) for ELISA IgG test, respectively.

References

Karimi A, Alborzi A, Rasooli M, Kadivar MR, Nateghian AR. Prevalence of antibody to Brucella species in butchers and slaughterers and others. East Mediterr Health J 2003;9(1-2):178-84.

Young EJ. Brucella species. In: Mandell GL, Bennett JE, Dolin R, eds. Principles and practice of infectious diseases. 7th ed. Philadelphia: Churchill Livingstone Elsevier 2010; p.2921-25.

Young EJ. Serologic diagnosis of human brucellosis: analysis of 214 cases by agglutination tests and review of the literature. Rev Infect Dis 1991;13(3):359-72.

Pappas G, Akritidis N, Bosilkovski M, Tsianos E. Brucellosis. N Engl J Med 2005;352(22):2325-36.

Osoba AO, Balkhy H, Memish Z, Khan MY, Al-Thagafi A, Al Shareef B, Al Mowallad A, Oni GA. Diagnostic value of Brucella ELISA IgG and IgM in bacteremic and non-bacteremic patients with brucellosis.J Chemother 2001;13(Supple 1):54-9.

Araj GF, Kattar MM, Fattouh LG, Bajakian KO, Kobeissi SA. Evaluation of the PANBIO Brucella immunoglobulin G (IgG) and IgM enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays for diagnosis of human brucellosis. Clin Diagn Lab Immunol 2005;12(11):1334-5.

Karplus R, Ramlawi A, Banai M, Maayan S. The use of ELISA in a seroprevalence study of Brucella antibodies in West Bank Palestinian women of childbearing age. Int J Infect Dis 2007;11(4):367-8.

Memish ZA, Almuneef M, Mah MW, Qassem LA, Osoba AO. Comparison of the Brucella Standard Agglutination Test with the ELISA IgG and IgM in patients with Brucella bacteremia. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis 2002;44(2):129-32.

Ciftçi C, Oztürk F, Oztekin A, Karaoğlan H, Saba R, Gültekin M, Mamikoğlu L. Comparison of the serological tests used for the laboratory diagnosis of brucellosis. Mikrobiyol Bul 2005;39(3):291-9.

Almuneef M, Memish ZA. Prevalence of Brucella antibodies after acute brucellosis. J Chemother 2003;15(2):148-51.

Ariza J, Pellicer T, Pallarés R, Foz A, Gudiol F. Specific antibody profile in human brucellosis. Clin Infect Dis 1992;14(1):131-40.

Corbel MJ. Recent advances in brucellosis. J Med Microbiol 1997;46(2):101-3.

Hashemi SH, Keramat F, Ranjbar M, Mamani M, Farzam A, Jamal-Omidi S. Osteoarticular complications of brucellosis in Hamedan, an endemic area in the west of Iran. Int J Infect Dis 2007;11(6):496-500.

Gad El-Rab MO, Kambal AM. Evaluation of a Brucella enzyme immunoassay test (ELISA) in comparison with bacteriological culture and agglutination. J Infect 1998;36(2):197-201.

Kiel FW, Khan MY. Analysis of 506 consecutive positive serologic tests for brucellosis in Saudi Arabia. J Clin Microbiol 1987;25(8):1384-7.

Al Dahouk S, Tomaso H, Nöckler K, Neubauer H, Frangoulidis D. Laboratory-based diagnosis of brucellosis--a review of the literature. Part II: serological tests for brucellosis. Clin Lab 2003;49(11-12):577-89.

Gómez MC, Nieto JA, Rosa C, Geijo P, Escribano MA, Muñoz A, López C. Evaluation of seven tests for diagnosis of human brucellosis in area where the disease is endemic. Clin Vaccine Immunol 2008;15(6):1031-3.

How to Cite
1.
Hasibi M, Jafari S, Mortazavi H, Asadollahi M, Esmaeeli Djavid G. Determination of the Accuracy and Optimal Cut-Off Point for ELISA Test in Diagnosis of Human Brucellosis in Iran. Acta Med Iran. 51(10):687-692.
Section
Articles