Detection of toxin production in Clostridium difficile strains by three different methods.
OBJECTIVE
To compare two immunoassays for detection of toxins produced in vitro by isolates of Clostridium difficile with the standard tissue culture assay, to help in the diagnosis of C. difficile-associated diarrhoea.


METHODS
Toxin production was investigated in 42 strains of C. difficile of various serotypes, ribotypes and S-protein types. These included strains from our laboratory collection, strains freshly isolated from stool specimens of patients suspected of suffering from C. difficile-associated disease or of carrying it asymptomatically, and one reference strain (NCTC 11223). Toxin was assayed by (i) a rapid slide immunoassay (C. difficile toxin A test, Clearview, Oxoid), (ii) an enzyme-linked microplate immunoassay (C. difficile toxin A/B test, Techlab), and (iii) a tissue culture assay. The rapid slide assay and the enzyme immunoassay were performed according to the manufacturers' recommendations. The tissue culture assay was performed using Vero cells.


RESULTS
Thirty of the 42 strains (71%) were shown to be positive for toxin A by the slide immunoassay and 34 of the strains (81%) were found to be toxin A/B producers by the enzyme immunoassay. The same 34 strains that were positive in the enzyme immunoassay also produced toxin B (cytotoxin) in the tissue culture assay. The sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values for the rapid slide immunoassay method were calculated to be 88.2%, 100.0%, 100.0% and 66.7%, respectively, when compared to tissue culture assay results as the reference method. These values for the enzyme immunoassay method were all 100.0%. In this study eight strains were found to be non-toxin-producing by all methods. It is possible that there were four strains that only produced toxin B (A- B+), and were missed by the rapid A-only assay.


CONCLUSIONS
We can recommend the use of the Techlab A + B enzyme immunoassay for the detection of toxin production by C. difficile strains because of its high sensitivity and specificity, its ease of use, and its capability of detecting both A- and B-type toxins.
Yücesoy
M
M
Dokuz Eylül University, Medical School, Department of Microbiology and Clinical Microbiology, Izmir, Turkey. mine.yucesoy@deu.edu.tr
McCoubrey
J
J
Brown
R
R
Poxton
I R
IR
D000818:Animals; D000900:Anti-Bacterial Agents / Q000009:adverse effects; D001427:Bacterial Toxins / Q000032:analysis* / Q000096:biosynthesis / Q000145:classification; D002522:Chlorocebus aethiops; D016360:Clostridioides difficile / Q000737:chemistry* / Q000302:isolation & purification* / Q000378:metabolism; D004761:Enterocolitis, Pseudomembranous / Q000175:diagnosis*; D005188:False Negative Reactions; D005189:False Positive Reactions; D006801:Humans; D007118:Immunoassay / Q000379:methods*; D012680:Sensitivity and Specificity; D014709:Vero Cells
D000900:Anti-Bacterial Agents; D001427:Bacterial Toxins