Clinical and Diagnostic Laboratory Immunology, May 1998, p. 407-409, Vol. 5, No. 3
1071-412X/98/$04.00+0
Copyright © 1998, American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.
Clinical Evaluation of a Rapid
Immunochromatographic Test for the Diagnosis of Dengue Virus
Infection
Chew Theng
Sang,1
Lim Siew
Hoon,1
Andrea
Cuzzubbo,2 and
Peter
Devine3,*
Department of Pathology, Singapore General
Hospital, Singapore, Singapore,1 and
PanBio Pty., Ltd.,2
and
Clinical Sciences, Royal Brisbane
Hospital,3 Brisbane, Australia
Received 8 September 1997/Returned for modification 27 October
1997/Accepted 17 February 1998
 |
ABSTRACT |
A rapid immunochromatographic test was compared to the
hemagglutination inhibition assay for separate determinations of dengue virus-specific immunoglobulin M (IgM) and IgG levels in paired serum
specimens from 92 patients (34 with primary dengue virus infection, 35 with secondary dengue virus infection, and 23 without dengue virus
infection). The rapid test showed 99% sensitivity in the diagnosis of
dengue virus infection. The majority (30 of 34 [88%]) of patients
with primary infection showed positive IgM but negative IgG, while 34 of 35 (97%) patients with secondary infection showed positive IgG with
or without IgM. Specificity in nonflavivirus infections was 96% (1 of
23 positive). The rapid test should be a useful aid in rapid diagnosis
of dengue virus infection.
 |
TEXT |
Dengue virus, a flavivirus, is found
in areas of the tropics and subtropics. Four serotypes of the virus
(dengue-1 to -4) are observed; these are closely related but
antigenically distinct (8). The virus, which causes disease
in humans, is transmitted by mosquito, principally Aedes
aegypti. In terms of morbidity, mortality, and economic costs,
dengue is the most important mosquito-borne disease in the world, with
an estimated 50 to 100 million cases per year (6, 7).
Furthermore, the incidence and spread of the disease are increasing
(4, 14).
Primary infection with dengue virus results in a self-limiting disease
characterized by mild to high fever lasting 3 to 7 days, severe
headache with pain behind the eyes, muscle and joint pain, and a rash
(14, 15). Secondary infection with a different dengue virus
serotype is the more common form of the disease in many parts of
Southeast Asia and South America (3). This form of the
disease is more serious and can result in dengue hemorrhagic fever and
dengue shock syndrome. The major clinical symptoms can include high
fever, hemorrhagic events, and circulatory failure, and the fatality
rate can be as high as 30%. Early diagnosis of dengue shock syndrome
is particularly important, as patients may die within 12 to 24 h
if appropriate treatment is not administered (12, 15).
Primary dengue virus infection is characterized by elevations in
specific immunoglobulin M (IgM) levels 3 to 5 days after the onset of
symptoms; this generally persists for 30 to 60 days (9, 10).
IgG levels also become elevated after 10 to 14 days, and these remain
detectable for life, though at a hemagglutination inhibition assay
(HAI) titer of
1:640 (5). During secondary infection, IgM
levels generally rise more slowly and reach lower levels than in
primary infection, while IgG levels rise rapidly from 1 to 2 days after
the onset of symptoms (5, 9). The HAI titer rises to
1:2,560, and these levels persist for 30 to 40 days before returning
to levels of
1:640 (5).
Traditionally, HAI has been used to classify dengue infections as
primary or secondary. The current definition depends upon an assay of
paired serum specimens separated by at least 7 days (fourfold rise in
titer), though any acute-phase specimen with an HAI titer of
1:2,560
is defined as coming from a patient with secondary infection
(17). Despite its general acceptance as a standard
laboratory test for dengue diagnosis, variations in methods used in
different laboratories can make it difficult to compare HAI results.
Furthermore, HAI requires extraction of sera as well as the preparation
of a series of dilutions for each sample. In addition, sera may need to
be collected after hospital discharge to confirm the diagnosis.
Consequently, a simple, commercially available assay for dengue
diagnosis would offer distinct advantages over HAI. In this study, the
Dengue Rapid Test (PanBio Pty., Ltd., Brisbane, Australia) was compared
to HAI with paired sera collected from patients presenting at Singapore
General Hospital.
In the Dengue Rapid Test, both IgM and IgG levels are determined with a
capture assay format (Fig. 1). A drop of
serum is added to the serum pad in the test device, and it migrates
along the nitrocellulose membrane, where IgG and IgM are captured by lines of either anti-human IgG or anti-human IgM striped onto the
membrane. At the same time, a gold-labelled anti-dengue virus monoclonal antibody (MAb) is rehydrated by the addition of two drops of
buffer to the conjugate pad. After the serum reaches the limit line
(<2 min), the card is closed. This allows the rehydrated gold-labelled
anti-dengue virus MAb to complex with dengue virus types 1 to 4 stabilized in the pad at the top of the nitrocellulose membrane. In
addition, closure of the card draws the flow of gold-complexed antigen
in the reverse direction, down the nitrocellulose membrane and into the
large absorbent pad, which allows binding of gold-complexed antigen to
the bound IgM or IgG. After 5 min, the assay result is read visually
through the window on the front panel of the card. The captured
gold-labelled antigen-antibody complexes appear as maroon lines. Tests
are read blind to eliminate reader bias, with the intensity of the
lines observed in the rapid test scored as nonreactive, weakly
positive, or strongly positive, depending on the intensity of the
reaction. In addition to the anti-IgG and anti-IgM lines, a control
line is included to ensure that the test result is valid. Positive
control (HAI titer, 1:2,560) and negative control (HAI titer, 1:10)
sera are also included with each run. Since the IgG cutoff in the test
has been set to detect the high IgG levels characteristic of secondary
dengue infection, primary dengue infection is defined by a visible IgM line without a visible IgG line while secondary dengue infection is
defined as a visible IgG line with or without a positive IgM line. A
negative result is defined by the absence of both an IgM line and an
IgG line (control line only visible).

View larger version (103K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 1.
Inside view of the PanBio Dengue Rapid Test device,
showing general instructions for use. The locations of the antigen pad,
gold-labelled MAb conjugate pad, and absorbent pad are shown, as well
as the anti-human ( h) IgG, anti-human IgM, control, and limit
lines.
|
|
Sera were tested for HAI antibodies as described previously
(2) except that the assay was modified to a microtiter plate format. Serum inhibitors were removed by pretreatment with kaolin absorption, and naturally occurring nonspecific agglutinins were absorbed out with packed gander cells. Serum dilutions were carried out
in borate-buffered saline, pH 9.0, containing 1% Proteose Peptone
(Difco, Detroit, Mich.). Antigens were produced by sucrose acetone
extraction of the brains of suckling mice infected with dengue virus
type 1 or 2, purchased from the Virus Research Institute, Ministry of
Public Health, Bangkok, Thailand. Gander blood was obtained from the
Singapore Primary Productions Department and used at a final
concentration of 0.4%. Results were read after an incubation period of
2 h. A positive control (HAI titer, 1:2,560) and a negative
control (HAI titer, <1:10) were included in each assay. Dengue virus
infection was defined by World Health Organization criteria
(17). That is, a fourfold rise in titer in sera collected 7 days apart defined dengue virus infection (primary or secondary), and
an HAI titer of
1:2,560 in any serum specimen defined secondary dengue infection.
All patients who participated in this study were suspected to have
dengue infection, based on their clinical symptoms. Patients were
admitted to Singapore General Hospital from June to October 1996. Dengue virus serotypes 1 and 2 were circulating in Singapore at this
time. The acute-phase sera were collected at the time of hospital
admission, while the convalescent-phase sera were collected 7 to 21 days later. By HAI and the criteria given above, patients were
classified as having primary dengue virus infection (n = 34), secondary dengue virus infection (n = 35), or no
dengue virus infection (n = 23). Viral isolation or
type-specific antibody assays were not performed.
The combined use of IgM and IgG has been shown to increase sensitivity
in the detection of dengue virus infection, since IgM is a good marker
of primary infection while elevation of IgG levels is an excellent
marker of secondary infection (9, 16). In this study, all
but one patient with dengue virus infection (99%) were detected by the
Dengue Rapid Test when paired sera were used (Table
1). The false-negative result occurred in
a patient with primary infection who showed low HAI titers in paired
sera (1:10 and 1:40). Eight other patients with primary infection also
showed the same HAI titers in paired sera, and these were detected in the rapid test. The Dengue Rapid Test also had excellent specificity (96%) for patients showing similar clinical presentations without dengue infection (Table 1). The one false-positive case showed an
elevation in the level of rapid test IgM but not IgG in the convalescent-phase sera, and this patient showed an HAI titer of 1:10
in both acute- and convalescent-phase sera.
Traditionally, HAI has been used to distinguish between primary and
secondary dengue virus infections, with a titer of
1:2,560 considered
indicative of secondary dengue virus infection (17). The IgG
readings in the Dengue Rapid Test showed excellent correlation with
HAI, with the majority of IgG-positive tests corresponding to an HAI
titer of
1:2,560 (
2 = 73.4; P < 0.0001 [chi-square test]) (Table 2).
Consequently, the rapid test had a high predictive value in classifying
dengue virus infections as primary or secondary (Table 1). The majority (30 of 34 [88%]) of patients with primary dengue virus infection showed elevations of IgM levels but not IgG levels, while three patients with primary dengue virus infection showed elevations of both
IgM and IgG levels and were consequently classified as having secondary
dengue virus infection by the rapid test. The HAI titers in the
convalescent-phase sera of these three patients were 1:80, 1:640, and
1:1,280. All but one patient (34 of 35 [97%]) with secondary dengue
virus infection showed elevations of IgG levels with or without IgM
(Table 1). Of these 34 cases of secondary dengue, 26 (76%) showed
positive IgM readings while the remainder showed undetectable IgM in
the rapid test.
Previous studies have suggested that diagnosis based on IgM alone may
take up to 7 days after the onset of infection (5, 9, 10, 11,
16). This is reflected when the rapid test results in acute-phase
sera are analyzed, with only 57% of dengue cases detected by this test
in the early acute phase of illness. In acute-phase sera, 16 of 34 cases (47%) of primary infection and 23 of 35 cases (66%) of
secondary infection were detected by the rapid test (not shown). All
cases of primary infection diagnosed with the rapid test on acute-phase
sera showed a positive-IgM-negative-IgG profile, while the majority
(19 of 23) of secondary dengue cases diagnosed through use of the
acute-phase sera showed elevations of IgG levels in the rapid test,
with 11 of these patients also showing elevations of IgM levels. In
contrast, HAI detected only 15 of 35 cases (43%) of secondary
infection and no cases of primary infection with the acute-phase sera
(HAI titer,
1:2,560). The sensitivity of the rapid test compares
favorably to HAI in that a second serum specimen would need to be
assayed in less than half of the cases presented. However, as with all
serological tests, it is important to stress the use of the rapid test
as a diagnostic aid, the results of which should be taken in
conjunction with clinical symptoms and other available laboratory
results. That is, physicians making patient management decisions should not rely solely on this or any other serology test for clinical guidance unless the result is positive. We would suggest that a patient
with a negative test result and persisting symptoms be retested 3 to 4 days later to confirm the diagnosis of dengue virus infection.
Commercially available dot blot enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays for
dengue diagnosis have been described, and sensitivities and
specificities similar to the Dengue Rapid Test have been reported (1, 13, 18). A commercial dipstick dot blot enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay for IgM and IgG (Integrated Diagnostics, Baltimore, Md.) has been reported to have sensitivity of 95 to 98% and
specificity of 100% (18). The Dengue Blot test (Genelabs
Diagnostics, Singapore, Singapore) has been reported to have
sensitivity ranging from 92 to 98% and specificity of 81 to 88%
(1, 13), though low sensitivity for primary dengue virus
infections and high cross-reactivity in patients with malaria have been
reported (10, 13). The clinical diagnoses of the
nonflaviviral diseases tested in this study were not known, though in
another study only 1 of 10 sera from patients with malaria showed
cross-reactivity in the PanBio Dengue Rapid Test (9a).
Despite the similar performances of these tests, the Dengue Rapid Test
has the advantage of being easier to perform in that it does not
require dilution or pretreatment of sera to remove competing IgG or
rheumatoid factor, washing steps and multiple incubations are not
performed, preparation and dilution of reagents used in the test are
unnecessary, and a laboratory incubator (50°C for the dipstick test)
is not required. Furthermore, the rapid test takes only 5 min to run,
compared with at least 3 h for the dot blot assays. Consequently,
the Dengue Rapid Test should be a useful aid in the diagnosis of dengue
fever. It is rapid, easy to perform, and overcomes some of the
limitations associated with HAI. It has potential for use at the point
of care or in laboratories where the volume of testing is low or sporadic or where equipment is not available. However, as with all
serology-based assays, it is essential to interpret the results in
conjunction with other laboratory tests and clinical symptoms.
 |
FOOTNOTES |
*
Corresponding author. Mailing address: B Floor,
Clinical Sciences, Royal Brisbane Hospital, Herston 4129, Queensland,
Australia. Phone: 61-7-33655202. Fax: 61-7-33655203.
 |
REFERENCES |
| 1.
|
Cardosa, M. J.,
F. Baharudin,
S. Hamid,
T. P. Hooi, and S. Nimmanitya.
1995.
A nitrocellulose membrane based IgM capture enzyme immunoassay for etiological diagnosis of dengue virus infections.
Clin. Diagn. Virol.
3:343-350.
|
| 2.
|
Clarke, D. H., and J. Casals.
1958.
Techniques for hemagglutination and hemagglutination inhibition with arthropod-borne viruses.
Am. J. Trop. Med. Hyg.
7:561-573.
|
| 3.
|
Gubler, D. J.
1991.
Dengue haemorrhagic fever: a global update.
Virus Inf. Exchange Newsl.
8:2-3.
|
| 4.
|
Gubler, D. J.
1996.
World distribution of dengue.
Dengue Bull.
20:1-4.
|
| 5.
|
Gubler, D. J.
1996.
Serological diagnosis of dengue/dengue haemorrhagic fever.
Dengue Bull.
20:20-23.
|
| 6.
|
Halstead, S. B.
1984.
Selective primary health care: strategies for control of disease in the developing world. XI. Dengue.
Rev. Infect. Dis.
6:251-264[Medline].
|
| 7.
|
Halstead, S. B.
1988.
Pathogenesis of dengue: challenges to molecular biology.
Science
239:476-481[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 8.
|
Henchal, E. A., and J. R. Putnak.
1990.
The dengue viruses.
Clin. Microbiol. Rev.
3:376-396[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 9.
|
Innis, B. L.,
A. Nisalak,
S. Nammanitya,
S. Kusalerdchariya,
V. Chongswasdi,
S. Suntayakorn,
P. Puttisri, and C. H. Hoke.
1989.
An enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay to characterise dengue infections where dengue and Japanese encephalitis co-circulate.
Am. J. Trop. Med. Hyg.
40:418-427.
|
| 9a.
| Lam, S. K. Personal communication.
|
| 10.
|
Lam, S. K.
1993.
Rapid dengue diagnosis and interpretation.
Malays. J. Pathol.
15:9-12[Medline].
|
| 11.
|
Lam, S. K.
1995.
Application of rapid laboratory diagnosis in dengue control.
Asia Pac. J. Mol. Biol. Biotechnol.
3:351-355.
|
| 12.
|
Lam, S. K.
1995.
Dengue haemorrhagic fever.
Rev. Med. Microbiol.
6:39-48.
|
| 13.
|
Lam, S. K.,
M. Y. Fong,
E. Chungue,
S. Doraisingham,
A. Igarashi,
M. A. Khin,
Z. T. Kyaw,
A. Nisalak,
C. Roche,
D. W. Vaughn, and V. Vorndam.
1996.
Multicentre evaluation of dengue IgM dot enzyme immunoassay.
Clin. Diagn. Virol.
7:93-98[Medline].
|
| 14.
|
Monath, T. P., and F. X. Heinz.
1996.
Flaviviruses, p. 1016-1021.
In
B. N. Fields, D. M. Knipe, and P. M. Howley (ed.), Virology. Lippincott-Raven, New York, N.Y.
|
| 15.
|
Nimmannitya, S.
1996.
Clinical management of dengue fever/dengue haemorrhagic fever/dengue shock syndrome.
Dengue Bull.
20:13-19.
|
| 16.
|
Ruechusatawat, K.,
K. Morita,
M. Tanaka,
S. Vongcheree,
S. Rojanasuphot,
P. Warachit,
K. Kanai,
P. Thongtradol,
P. Nimnakorn,
S. Kanungkid, and A. Igarashi.
1994.
Daily observation of antibody levels among dengue patients detected by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA).
Jpn. J. Trop. Med. Hyg.
22:9-12.
|
| 17.
|
World Health Organization.
1986.
Dengue haemorrhagic fever: diagnosis, treatment and control.
World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.
|
| 18.
|
Wu, S.-J. L.,
B. Hanson,
H. Paxton,
A. Nisalak,
D. W. Vaughn,
C. Rossi,
E. A. Henchal,
K. R. Porter,
D. M. Watts, and C. G. Hayes.
1997.
Evaluation of a dipstick enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay for detection of antibodies to dengue virus.
Clin. Diagn. Lab. Immunol.
4:452-457[Abstract].
|
Clinical and Diagnostic Laboratory Immunology, May 1998, p. 407-409, Vol. 5, No. 3
1071-412X/98/$04.00+0
Copyright © 1998, American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.