ML Flow and anti-PGL-I ELISA are serological tests that detect IgM antibodies against the phenolic glycolipid I (PGL-I), specific to Mycobacterium leprae. To evaluate the outcomes of ML Flow and ELISA (PGL-I) serological tests in leprosy-endemic areas in comparison to non-endemic ones, a total of 351 volunteers from Brazil and Chile were examined, including leprosy patients, healthy controls and others affected by other infectious or non-infectious diseases that are common differential diagnoses for leprosy. The ELISA cut-off point was established using the ROC Curve method (>or= 0.157). In endemic areas, 70% of leprosy patients present positive ML Flow results and 53.3% were ELISA-positive. In non-endemic areas, ML Flow was negative in all the subjects tested and ELISA was positive in 4 volunteers. ML Flow is faster and more easily performed and, therefore, a more adequate test for use in basic, primary-level health care centers. ELISA requires trained personnel, in addition to a more complex laboratory infrastructure.
BT - Revista da Sociedade Brasileira de Medicina Tropical C1 - http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19618070?dopt=Abstract DA - 2008 DO - 10.1590/s0037-86822008000700005 J2 - Rev. Soc. Bras. Med. Trop. LA - eng N2 -ML Flow and anti-PGL-I ELISA are serological tests that detect IgM antibodies against the phenolic glycolipid I (PGL-I), specific to Mycobacterium leprae. To evaluate the outcomes of ML Flow and ELISA (PGL-I) serological tests in leprosy-endemic areas in comparison to non-endemic ones, a total of 351 volunteers from Brazil and Chile were examined, including leprosy patients, healthy controls and others affected by other infectious or non-infectious diseases that are common differential diagnoses for leprosy. The ELISA cut-off point was established using the ROC Curve method (>or= 0.157). In endemic areas, 70% of leprosy patients present positive ML Flow results and 53.3% were ELISA-positive. In non-endemic areas, ML Flow was negative in all the subjects tested and ELISA was positive in 4 volunteers. ML Flow is faster and more easily performed and, therefore, a more adequate test for use in basic, primary-level health care centers. ELISA requires trained personnel, in addition to a more complex laboratory infrastructure.
PY - 2008 SP - 19 EP - 22 T2 - Revista da Sociedade Brasileira de Medicina Tropical TI - The result patterns of ML Flow and ELISA (PGL-I) serologic tests in leprosy-endemic and non-endemic areas. VL - 41 Suppl 2 SN - 1678-9849 ER -