Previous Article | Next Article ![]()
Clinical and Diagnostic Laboratory Immunology, July 1999, p. 615-616, Vol. 6, No. 4
Division of Clinical Pathology, Department of
Pathology, and Department of Pediatrics, University of Utah, ARUP
Laboratories and the ARUP Institute for Clinical and Experimental
Pathology, Salt Lake City, Utah 84132
Received 9 February 1999/Returned for modification 1 April
1999/Accepted 13 April 1999
Heterophile antibodies are a well-recognized cause of erroneous
results in immunoassays. We describe here a 22-month-old child with
heterophile antibodies reactive with bovine serum albumin and caprine
proteins causing false-positive results to human immunodeficiency virus
type 1 and other infectious serology testing.
Heterophile antibodies are a
well-recognized cause of interference in immunoassays, potentially
giving rise to false-positive results (3, 5, 8). Heterophile
antibodies may have some specificity, as with human anti-mouse
antibodies (HAMA), but by definition they react with a number of
different epitopes. Two-site immunoassays are susceptible to
interference when heterophile antibodies bridge the capture and
detection antibodies, as can occur with HAMA (2). HAMA and
other heterophile antibodies may be present in as many as 40% of
individuals, especially in patients treated with monoclonal antibody
immunotherapy (6, 7). Heterophile antibodies reactive with
other molecules used in immunoassays have not been well characterized
but can also cause false assay results (4).
We describe here a case of heterophile antibodies that are
cross-reactive with bovine and caprine proteins occurring in a 22-month-old child, causing false-positive immunoassay results to human
immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) and a number of other infectious
serology tests. A 22-month-old boy with a history of Down syndrome and
endocardial cushion defect repair was admitted for fevers of up to
103°F of several days' duration and for respiratory distress. A
chest radiograph showed bilateral upper-lobe pneumonias. The patient
failed to respond to antibiotic therapy and a chest computerized
tomogram (CT) showed a left upper-lobe abscess. The abscess was
surgically drained and cultures grew Candida,
Enterobacter, and gram-positive cocci.
Table 1 shows results of enzyme-linked
immunosorbent assay (ELISA) laboratory testing for a number of
infectious agents. Notably, an HIV-1 enzyme immunoassay (EIA) was
positive (Table 1), with an inconclusive pattern on confirmatory
Western blot (Fig. 1). Also, the pattern
of Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) serologies was atypical, since the
immunoglobulin G (IgG) antibody to early antigen appeared to be
present, but neither IgM nor IgG antibodies for the viral capsid
antigen were found. In addition, an unusual pattern was seen on
immunodiffusion for Histoplasma antibodies. An abnormal line
of precipitation was seen between the patient's serum and the goat
anti-histoplasma control antibodies, suggesting the presence of human
anti-goat antibodies in the patient's serum.
1071-412X/99/$04.00+0
Copyright © 1999, American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.
Heterophile Antibodies to Bovine and Caprine
Proteins Causing False-Positive Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1 and
Other Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay Results
![]()
ABSTRACT
Top
Abstract
Text
References
![]()
TEXT
Top
Abstract
Text
References
TABLE 1.
Results of infectious
serology testinga
![]()
View larger version (38K):
[in a new window]
FIG. 1.
HIV Western blot results. (A) Negative control; (B)
patient showing strong nonspecific staining; (C) positive control.
Further immunodiffusion tests were performed with the patient's serum to confirm the presence of human anti-goat antibodies. These immunodiffusion tests showed immunoprecipitation bands between the patient's serum and goat serum, bovine serum albumin (BSA), fetal bovine serum (FBS), and powdered-milk proteins. These results indicated the presence of heterophile antibodies that react with components of goat serum, BSA, FBS, and powdered milk.
We also performed immunofixation electrophoresis of goat serum, BSA, FBS, and powdered milk by using the patient's serum as the overlaying antibody (Fig. 2). This showed reactivity of patient antibodies to goat and bovine albumin, some reactivity in the gamma region (immunoglobulins) of the goat serum, and mild diffuse staining of the powdered-milk proteins.
|
We wanted to test the possible role of the patient's heterophile antibodies in causing false-positive ELISA test results. Therefore, we preabsorbed the patient's serum with BSA and goat serum to remove the heterophile antibodies. After preabsorption, testing for Bartonella henselae was negative, and the HIV-1 EIA was less reactive. Preabsorption with powdered milk did not change any results.
Based on the electrophoresis and preabsorption studies, we believe the positive test results observed in this patient were due to heterophile antibodies reactive with BSA and caprine proteins. All of the positive tests observed used BSA as a blocking agent for the preparation of the microELISA reaction wells. BSA is commonly used to cover other epitopes that may be present in the wells. In this case the patient's heterophile antibody reacted with the BSA in the reaction well and is then detected by the labeled anti-human detection antibody, thus giving a false-positive reaction. A false-positive result was not seen when BSA was used in the specimen diluent, resulting in the heterophile antibodies being preabsorbed. Review of the specific test components used in the different test kits in this case showed that the heterophile antibody caused a false-positive result only when BSA was used to block the microtiter wells but was not in the specimen diluent. Anti-BSA antibodies have previously been investigated in the pathogenesis of diabetes mellitus (1), but their prevalence and interference in immunoassays are not known. Conceivably, anti-BSA antibodies could be quite common, since most immunoassays use BSA in the specimen diluent, so that in most instances these antibodies would be preabsorbed and not detected. Heterophile antibodies should be considered in instances of multiple presumed false-positive test results that are not consistent with the clinical situation.
| |
FOOTNOTES |
|---|
* Corresponding author. Mailing address: Department of Pathology, University of Utah, 50 N. Medical Dr., Salt Lake City, UT 84132. Phone: (801) 585-6864. Fax: (801) 585-6285. E-mail: Christine_Litwin{at}hlthsci.med.utah.edu.
| |
REFERENCES |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| 1. |
Atkinson, M. A.,
M. A. Bowman,
K. J. Kao,
L. Campbell,
P. J. Dush,
S. C. Shah,
O. Simell, and N. K. Maclaren.
1993.
Lack of immune responsiveness to bovine serum albumin in insulin-dependent diabetes.
N. Engl. J. Med.
329:1853-1858 |
| 2. | Hansen, H. J., C. L. Sullivan, and R. M. Sharkey. 1993. HAMA interference with murine monoclonal antibody-based immunoassays. J. Clin. Immunoassay 16:294-299. |
| 3. |
Kricka, L. J.,
D. Schmerfeld-Pruss,
M. Senior,
D. B. Goodman, and P. Kaladas.
1990.
Interference by human anti-mouse antibody in two-site immunoassays.
Clin. Chem.
36:892-894 |
| 4. | Levinson, S. S. 1992. Antibody multispecificity in immunoassay interference. Clin. Biochem. 25:77-87[Medline]. |
| 5. |
Nahm, M. H., and J. W. Hoffmann.
1990.
Heteroantibody: phantom of the immunoassay.
Clin. Chem.
36:829 |
| 6. | Reynolds, J. C., S. Del Vecchio, H. Sakahara, M. E. Lora, J. A. Carrasquillo, R. D. Neumann, and S. M. Larson. 1989. Anti-murine antibody response to mouse monoclonal antibodies: clinical findings and implications. Int. J. Radiat. Appl. Instr. 16:121-125. |
| 7. |
Schroff, R. W.,
K. A. Foon,
S. M. Beatty,
R. K. Oldham, and A. C. Morgan, Jr.
1985.
Human anti-murine immunoglobulin responses in patients receiving monoclonal antibody therapy.
Cancer Res.
45:879-885 |
| 8. | Sosolik, R. C., C. L. Hitchcock, and W. J. Becker. 1997. Heterophilic antibodies produce spuriously elevated concentrations of the MB isoenzyme of creatine kinase in a selected patient population. Am. J. Clin. Pathol. 107:506-510[Medline]. |
This article has been cited by other articles:
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Copyright © 2009 by the American Society for Microbiology. For an alternate route to Journals.ASM.org, visit: http://intl-journals.asm.org | More Info»