01861nas a2200325   4500000000100000008004100001260001400042653002600056653002700082653002400109653002500133653003800158653001600196653001100212653002300223653001200246653002500258653002500283653002500308653003000333653003200363100001400395700001600409245011700425300000900542490000700551050001700558520094600575022001401521       2001                            d  c2001-200210aAntibodies, Bacterial10aAntibodies, Monoclonal10aAntigens, Bacterial10aBinding, Competitive10aEnzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay10aGlycolipids10aHumans10aLeprostatic Agents10aleprosy10aLeprosy, lepromatous10aLeprosy, Tuberculoid10aMycobacterium leprae10aPredictive Value of Tests10aSensitivity and Specificity1 aParkash O1 aGirdhar B K00aA comparative and combinatorial study on two serological assays for detection of Mycobacterium leprae infection.  a63-90 v12  aPARKASH 20013 a<p>The performances of two Mycobacterium leprae specific serological assays namely: phenolicglycolipid-l-based enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (PGL-ELISA) and a monoclonal antibody-based inhibition test (MAIT) were studied for there efficiency to detect M. leprae infection. As usual, both the tests were more sensitive to detect lepromatous leprosy patients than tuberculoid type of leprosy patients. Considering the efficiency to detect leprosy patients, the MAIT was slightly more sensitive and specific than PGL-ELISA. When the results of both assays are considered together, a better sensitivity (over the sensitivity of individual assay) was obtained while maintaining good enough specificity. These findings point out that a combinatorial approach for detection of M. leprae infection would be a better strategy to detect M. leprae infection. Hence, it may act as a better tool for measurement of bacterial load in the patients.</p>  a0001-5938