Diagnostic accuracy of three commercial immunoenzymatic assays for small ruminant lentivirus infection in goats performed on individual milk samples.

Caprine arthritis-encephalitis Competitive ELISA Indirect ELISA ROC curve Sensitivity Specificity

Journal

Preventive veterinary medicine
ISSN: 1873-1716
Titre abrégé: Prev Vet Med
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 8217463

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
08 Apr 2021
Historique:
received: 28 01 2021
revised: 21 03 2021
accepted: 06 04 2021
pubmed: 17 4 2021
medline: 17 4 2021
entrez: 16 4 2021
Statut: aheadofprint

Résumé

Caprine arthritis-encephalitis (CAE) caused by small ruminant lentivirus (SRLV) infection is one of the most widespread and devastating diseases of goats. Serological methods, mainly immunoenzymatic assays (ELISA), are the mainstay of CAE diagnostics. Even though blood is still the most commonly tested material, animal welfare issues and increasing costs of veterinary service prompt the development of serological methods based on milk testing. Several different types of ELISAs for CAE are available on the market. All of them perform well on serum, however their diagnostic accuracy for testing milk has not been so far compared. Therefore, we carried out the study in 5 dairy goat herds in Poland whose previous epidemiological situation regarding CAE was known. Paired serum and milk samples were collected from all adult females (n = 420) and tested with 3 commercial ELISAs - indirect ELISA based on the whole-virus antigen (wELISA), indirect ELISA based on the recombined transmembrane and capsid protein (TM/CA-ELISA), and competitive ELISA based on the surface glycoprotein (SU-ELISA). Milk was tested as lactoserum at dilution of 1/2 in wELISA and TM/CA-ELISA, and undiluted in SU-ELISA. The true status of goats was based on the composite reference standard comprising the results of all three ELISAs done on serum and the true prevalence of SRLV infection in the herd of origin. 243 (57.9 %) goats were classified as truly positive and 177 (42.1 %) goats as truly negative. Diagnostic accuracy was evaluated using the area under the ROC curve (AUROC) as well as sensitivity (Se) and specificity (Sp) for a range of cut-off values. AUROC was 98.8 % (CI 95 %: 97.5 %, 100 %) for wELISA, 97.9 % (CI 95 %: 96.5 %, 99.2 %) for TM/CA-ELISA, and 91.7 % (CI 95 %: 88.9 %, 94.5 %) for SU-ELISA. At the cut-off values recommended by the manufacturers both indirect ELISAs were highly sensitive (89.3 % and 91.4 %, respectively) and highly specific (98.3 % and 95.5 %, respectively), whereas SU-ELISA had only moderate Se (71.2 %) at comparably high Sp (96.6 %). Nevertheless, the optimal cut-off values were lower than those recommended by manufacturers for serum - sample-to-positive control serum ratio (S/P%) of 10 % for wELISA, S/P% of 80 % for TM/CA-ELISA, and percentage inhibition of 23 % for SU-ELISA. Concluding, the study shows that wELISA and TM/CA-ELISA may be interchangeably used for testing individual goat milk samples for SRLV infection. Diagnostic sensitivity and specificity of these ELISAs appear not to be lower on milk than on serum. SU-ELISA is considerably less sensitive on milk samples than indirect ELISAs.

Identifiants

pubmed: 33862543
pii: S0167-5877(21)00091-X
doi: 10.1016/j.prevetmed.2021.105347
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

105347

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2021 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Auteurs

Adrian-Valentin Potărniche (AV)

Department of Infectious Diseases and Preventive Medicine, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Agricultural Sciences and Veterinary Medicine Cluj-Napoca, Calea Manastur 3-5, 400372, Cluj-Napoca, Romania.

Michał Czopowicz (M)

Division of Veterinary Epidemiology and Economics, Institute of Veterinary Medicine, Warsaw University of Life Sciences-SGGW, Nowoursynowska 159c, 02-776, Warsaw, Poland. Electronic address: mczopowicz@gmail.com.

Olga Szaluś-Jordanow (O)

Department of Small Animal Diseases with Clinic, Institute of Veterinary Medicine, Warsaw University of Life Sciences-SGGW, Nowoursynowska 159c, 02-776, Warsaw, Poland.

Agata Moroz (A)

Division of Veterinary Epidemiology and Economics, Institute of Veterinary Medicine, Warsaw University of Life Sciences-SGGW, Nowoursynowska 159c, 02-776, Warsaw, Poland.

Marcin Mickiewicz (M)

Division of Veterinary Epidemiology and Economics, Institute of Veterinary Medicine, Warsaw University of Life Sciences-SGGW, Nowoursynowska 159c, 02-776, Warsaw, Poland.

Lucjan Witkowski (L)

Division of Veterinary Epidemiology and Economics, Institute of Veterinary Medicine, Warsaw University of Life Sciences-SGGW, Nowoursynowska 159c, 02-776, Warsaw, Poland.

Iwona Markowska-Daniel (I)

Division of Veterinary Epidemiology and Economics, Institute of Veterinary Medicine, Warsaw University of Life Sciences-SGGW, Nowoursynowska 159c, 02-776, Warsaw, Poland.

Emilia Bagnicka (E)

Institute of Genetics and Animal Biotechnology, Polish Academy of Sciences, Postępu 36A, Jastrzębiec, 05-552, Magdalenka, Poland.

Constantin Cerbu (C)

Department of Infectious Diseases and Preventive Medicine, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Agricultural Sciences and Veterinary Medicine Cluj-Napoca, Calea Manastur 3-5, 400372, Cluj-Napoca, Romania.

Diana Olah (D)

Department of Infectious Diseases and Preventive Medicine, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Agricultural Sciences and Veterinary Medicine Cluj-Napoca, Calea Manastur 3-5, 400372, Cluj-Napoca, Romania.

Marina Spinu (M)

Department of Infectious Diseases and Preventive Medicine, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Agricultural Sciences and Veterinary Medicine Cluj-Napoca, Calea Manastur 3-5, 400372, Cluj-Napoca, Romania.

Jarosław Kaba (J)

Division of Veterinary Epidemiology and Economics, Institute of Veterinary Medicine, Warsaw University of Life Sciences-SGGW, Nowoursynowska 159c, 02-776, Warsaw, Poland.

Classifications MeSH