| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Previous Article | Next Article ![]()
Clinical and Vaccine Immunology, June 2007, p. 799-801, Vol. 14, No. 6
1071-412X/07/$08.00+0 doi:10.1128/CVI.00483-06
Copyright © 2007, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.

Division of Infectious Diseases, Tropical Medicine and AIDS, Academic Medical Center F4-217, P.O. Box 22700, 1100 DE Amsterdam, The Netherlands,1 Department of Virology, Cho Ray Hospital, 201 B Nguyen Chi Thanh, District 5, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam,2 Department of Tropical Diseases, Cho Ray Hospital, 201 B Nguyen Chi Thanh, District 5, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam,3 Department of Microbiology, Cho Ray Hospital, 201 B Nguyen Chi Thanh, District 5, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam,4 Binh Thuan Provincial Malaria Center, 133 A Hai Thuong Lan Ong, Phan Thiet City, Vietnam5
Received 27 December 2006/ Returned for modification 5 February 2007/ Accepted 12 April 2007
Results from two dengue rapid tests, the PanBio Duo cassette and the SD Bioline strip test, were compared to those of enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (Focus Diagnostics) from sera of 200 Vietnamese febrile patients. The PanBio assay was superior, with sensitivity and specificity values for acute-phase serum samples of 54% and 70% (immunoglobulin M) and 70% and 88% (immunoglobulin G), respectively.
Published ahead of print on 25 April 2007.
| Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. | Clin. Microbiol. Rev. | Infect. Immun. |
|---|---|---|
| J. Clin. Microbiol. | J. Virol. | ALL ASM JOURNALS |