Publication:
International laboratory comparison of influenza microneutralization assays for A(H1N1)pdm09, A(H3N2), and A(H5N1) influenza viruses by CONSISE

dc.contributor.authorKaren L. Laurieen_US
dc.contributor.authorOthmar G. Engelhardten_US
dc.contributor.authorJohn Wooden_US
dc.contributor.authorAlan Heathen_US
dc.contributor.authorJacqueline M. Katzen_US
dc.contributor.authorMalik Peirisen_US
dc.contributor.authorKatja Hoschleren_US
dc.contributor.authorOlav Hungnesen_US
dc.contributor.authorWenqing Zhangen_US
dc.contributor.authorMaria D. Van Kerkhoveen_US
dc.contributor.authorJaccqueline Katzen_US
dc.contributor.authorXiuhua Luen_US
dc.contributor.authorMin Levineen_US
dc.contributor.authorVic Veguillaen_US
dc.contributor.authorFeng Liuen_US
dc.contributor.authorYaohui Baien_US
dc.contributor.authorPilaipan Puthavathanaen_US
dc.contributor.authorHatairat Lerdsamranen_US
dc.contributor.authorPhisanu Pooruken_US
dc.contributor.authorKnnika Nateeromen_US
dc.contributor.authorMaria Rita Castruccien_US
dc.contributor.authorIsabella Donatellien_US
dc.contributor.authorMarzia Facchinien_US
dc.contributor.authorNoriko Kishidaen_US
dc.contributor.authorMasato Tashiroen_US
dc.contributor.authorTakato Odagirien_US
dc.contributor.authorShailesh D. Pawaren_US
dc.contributor.authorSadhana S. Kodeen_US
dc.contributor.authorAnthony Hawksworthen_US
dc.contributor.authorRyan Ortiguerraen_US
dc.contributor.authorGary Briceen_US
dc.contributor.authorNicholas Martinen_US
dc.contributor.authorTad Kochelen_US
dc.contributor.authorJose Sanchezen_US
dc.contributor.authorMichael Cooperen_US
dc.contributor.authorJames Cummingsen_US
dc.contributor.authorRalf Wagneren_US
dc.contributor.authorConstanze Goepferten_US
dc.contributor.authorNina Alexen_US
dc.contributor.authorJoanna Hammannen_US
dc.contributor.authorBritta Neumannen_US
dc.contributor.authorMahendra Pereraen_US
dc.contributor.authorEmanuele Montomolien_US
dc.contributor.authorGuilia Lapinien_US
dc.contributor.authorSara Sbragien_US
dc.contributor.authorTian Baien_US
dc.contributor.authorZaijiang Yuen_US
dc.contributor.authorJianfang Zhouen_US
dc.contributor.authorLouise Carolanen_US
dc.contributor.authorKaren Laurieen_US
dc.contributor.otherVictorian Infectious Diseases Reference Laboratoryen_US
dc.contributor.otherNational Institute for Biological Standards and Controlen_US
dc.contributor.otherCenters for Disease Control and Preventionen_US
dc.contributor.otherThe University of Hong Kongen_US
dc.contributor.otherPublic Health Englanden_US
dc.contributor.otherNorwegian Institute of Public Healthen_US
dc.contributor.otherOrganisation Mondiale de la Santeen_US
dc.contributor.otherInstitut Pasteur, Parisen_US
dc.contributor.otherMahidol Universityen_US
dc.contributor.otherIstituto Superiore Di Sanitaen_US
dc.contributor.otherNational Institute of Infectious Diseasesen_US
dc.contributor.otherNational Institute of Virology Indiaen_US
dc.contributor.otherU.S. Naval Health Research Centeren_US
dc.contributor.otherNaval Medical Research Centeren_US
dc.contributor.otherPaul-Ehrlich-Instituten_US
dc.contributor.otherUniversita degli Studi di Sienaen_US
dc.contributor.otherChinese National Influenza Centeren_US
dc.date.accessioned2018-11-23T09:52:11Z
dc.date.available2018-11-23T09:52:11Z
dc.date.issued2015-01-01en_US
dc.description.abstractCopyright © 2015, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved. The microneutralization assay is commonly used to detect antibodies to influenza virus, and multiple protocols are used worldwide. These protocols differ in the incubation time of the assay as well as in the order of specific steps, and even within protocols there are often further adjustments in individual laboratories. The impact these protocol variations have on influenza serology data is unclear. Thus, a laboratory comparison of the 2-day enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) and 3-day hemagglutination (HA) microneutralization (MN) protocols, using A(H1N1)pdm09, A(H3N2), and A(H5N1) viruses, was performed by the CONSISE Laboratory Working Group. Individual laboratories performed both assay protocols, on multiple occasions, using different serum panels. Thirteen laboratories from around the world participated. Within each laboratory, serum sample titers for the different assay protocols were compared between assays to determine the sensitivity of each assay and were compared between replicates to assess the reproducibility of each protocol for each laboratory. There was good correlation of the results obtained using the two assay protocols in most laboratories, indicating that these assays may be interchangeable for detecting antibodies to the influenza A viruses included in this study. Importantly, participating laboratories have aligned their methodologies to the CONSISE consensus 2-day ELISA and 3-day HAMNassay protocols to enable better correlation of these assays in the future.en_US
dc.identifier.citationClinical and Vaccine Immunology. Vol.22, No.8 (2015), 957-964en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1128/CVI.00278-15en_US
dc.identifier.issn1556679Xen_US
dc.identifier.issn15566811en_US
dc.identifier.other2-s2.0-84939480223en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://repository.li.mahidol.ac.th/handle/20.500.14594/35654
dc.rightsMahidol Universityen_US
dc.rights.holderSCOPUSen_US
dc.source.urihttps://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=84939480223&origin=inwarden_US
dc.subjectBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biologyen_US
dc.subjectImmunology and Microbiologyen_US
dc.titleInternational laboratory comparison of influenza microneutralization assays for A(H1N1)pdm09, A(H3N2), and A(H5N1) influenza viruses by CONSISEen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dspace.entity.typePublication
mu.datasource.scopushttps://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=84939480223&origin=inwarden_US

Files

Collections