Low sensitivity and frequent cross-reactions in commercially available antibody detection ELISA assays for Taenia solium cysticercosis

Objective: To evaluate the diagnostic performance of two commercially available ELISA kits, Novalisa^® and Ridascreen^®, for the detection of antibodies to Taenia solium, compared to serological diagnosis of neurocysticercosis (NCC) by LLGP-EITB (electro-immunotransfer blot assay using lentil-lectin purified glycoprotein antigens). Methods: Archive serum samples from patients with viable NCC (n = 45) or resolved, calcified NCC (n = 45), as well as sera from patients with other cestode parasites (hymenolepiasis, n = 45 and cystic hydatid disease, n = 45), were evaluated for cysticercosis antibody detection using two ELISA kits, Novalisa^® and Ridascreen^®. All NCC samples had previously tested positive, and all samples from heterologous infections were negative on LLGP-EITB for cysticercosis. Positive rates were calculated by kit and sample group and compared between the two kits. Results: Compared to LLGP-EITB, the sensitivity of both ELISA assays to detect specific antibodies in patients with viable NCC was low (44.4% and 22.2%), and for calcified NCC, it was only 6.7% and 4.5%. Sera from patients with cystic hydatid disease were highly cross-reactive in both ELISA assays (38/45, 84.4%; and 25/45, 55.6%). Sera from patients with hymenolepiasis cross-reacted in five cases in one of the assays (11.1%) and in only one sample with the second assay (2.2%). Conclusions: The performance of Novalisa^® and Ridascreen^® was poor. Antibody ELISA detection cannot be recommended for the diagnosis of neurocysticercosis.