Assessing the value of PCR assays in oral fluid samples for detecting African swine fever, classical swine fever, and foot-and-mouth disease in U.S. swine.
African Swine Fever
/ diagnosis
Animals
Asfarviridae
/ isolation & purification
Classical Swine Fever
/ diagnosis
Classical Swine Fever Virus
/ isolation & purification
Foot-and-Mouth Disease
/ diagnosis
Foot-and-Mouth Disease Virus
/ isolation & purification
Mouth Mucosa
/ virology
Prevalence
Probability
RNA, Viral
/ analysis
Real-Time Polymerase Chain Reaction
/ economics
Reproducibility of Results
Reverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction
/ economics
Saliva
/ virology
Sensitivity and Specificity
Swine
United States
Journal
PloS one
ISSN: 1932-6203
Titre abrégé: PLoS One
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101285081
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2019
2019
Historique:
received:
02
04
2019
accepted:
27
06
2019
entrez:
17
7
2019
pubmed:
17
7
2019
medline:
17
3
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Oral fluid sampling and testing offers a convenient, unobtrusive mechanism for evaluating the health status of swine, especially grower and finisher swine. This assessment evaluates the potential testing of oral fluid samples with real-time reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR) to detect African swine fever, classical swine fever, or foot-and-mouth disease for surveillance during a disease outbreak and early detection in a disease-free setting. We used a series of logical arguments, informed assumptions, and a range of parameter values from literature and industry practices to examine the cost and value of information provided by oral fluid sampling and rRT-PCR testing for the swine foreign animal disease surveillance objectives outlined above. Based on the evaluation, oral fluid testing demonstrated value for both settings evaluated. The greatest value was in an outbreak scenario, where using oral fluids would minimize disruption of animal and farm activities, reduce sample sizes by 23%-40%, and decrease resource requirements relative to current individual animal sampling plans. For an early detection system, sampling every 3 days met the designed prevalence detection threshold with 0.95 probability, but was quite costly. Implementation of oral fluid testing for African swine fever, classical swine fever, or foot-and-mouth disease surveillance is not yet possible due to several limitations and information gaps. The gaps include validation of PCR diagnostic protocols and kits for African swine fever, classical swine fever, or foot-and-mouth disease on swine oral fluid samples; minimal information on test performance in a field setting; detection windows with low virulence strains of some foreign animal disease viruses; and the need for confirmatory testing protocol development.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31310643
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0219532
pii: PONE-D-19-09374
pmc: PMC6634402
doi:
Substances chimiques
RNA, Viral
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, U.S. Gov't, Non-P.H.S.
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e0219532Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Références
J Vet Diagn Invest. 2017 Mar;29(2):254-257
pubmed: 28114861
PLoS One. 2016 Nov 7;11(11):e0166300
pubmed: 27820859
Vet Res. 2014 Sep 26;45:93
pubmed: 25256695
Transbound Emerg Dis. 2017 Apr;64(2):425-431
pubmed: 26104842
Can J Vet Res. 2016 Jan;80(1):12-20
pubmed: 26733728
J Vet Diagn Invest. 2015 Mar;27(2):140-9
pubmed: 25776540
Vet Res. 2010 Jul-Aug;41(4):45
pubmed: 20205988
Anim Health Res Rev. 2010 Dec;11(2):207-16
pubmed: 20202287
Biometrics. 2006 Dec;62(4):1170-7
pubmed: 17156292
BMC Vet Res. 2017 Jan 5;13(1):5
pubmed: 28056961
Comp Immunol Microbiol Infect Dis. 2002 Oct;25(5-6):331-43
pubmed: 12365809
Prev Vet Med. 2001 May 1;49(3-4):141-63
pubmed: 11311950
Front Vet Sci. 2016 Jun 01;3:44
pubmed: 27314002
Vet Microbiol. 2017 Sep;209:20-29
pubmed: 28284415
Vet Microbiol. 2012 Dec 7;160(3-4):327-40
pubmed: 22795261
PLoS One. 2015 May 04;10(5):e0125692
pubmed: 25938664
PLoS Curr. 2014 Nov 06;6:
pubmed: 25685630
Can J Vet Res. 2017 Apr;81(2):82-90
pubmed: 28408775
Vet Microbiol. 2013 Oct 25;166(3-4):450-60
pubmed: 23910522
PLoS One. 2015 Oct 02;10(10):e0139586
pubmed: 26431039
Transbound Emerg Dis. 2015 Oct;62(5):e71-5
pubmed: 24325543
Viruses. 2017 Apr 21;9(4):
pubmed: 28430168
Bull Math Biol. 2007 Jul;69(5):1511-36
pubmed: 17237913
J Vet Diagn Invest. 2013 May;25(3):328-35
pubmed: 23536612
Vet J. 2013 Oct;198(1):158-63
pubmed: 24011474
Vet Microbiol. 2009 Mar 30;135(3-4):222-30
pubmed: 19013029
Prev Vet Med. 2012 May 1;104(3-4):292-300
pubmed: 22154249
Vet Microbiol. 2009 Mar 30;135(3-4):196-204
pubmed: 18986777