Real-time fluorometric and end-point colorimetric isothermal assays for detection of equine pathogens C. psittaci and equine herpes virus 1: validation, comparison and application at the point of care.
Animals
Chlamydophila psittaci
/ isolation & purification
Female
Fluorometry
/ methods
Herpesviridae Infections
/ diagnosis
Herpesvirus 1, Equid
/ isolation & purification
Horse Diseases
/ diagnosis
Horses
Molecular Diagnostic Techniques
/ methods
Nucleic Acid Amplification Techniques
/ methods
Point-of-Care Systems
Psittacosis
/ diagnosis
Sensitivity and Specificity
Chlamydia
Colorimetric detection
EHV-1
Equines
Isothermal amplification
Point of care application
Journal
BMC veterinary research
ISSN: 1746-6148
Titre abrégé: BMC Vet Res
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101249759
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
19 Aug 2021
19 Aug 2021
Historique:
received:
23
04
2021
accepted:
04
08
2021
entrez:
20
8
2021
pubmed:
21
8
2021
medline:
9
11
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
C. psittaci has recently emerged as an equine abortigenic pathogen causing significant losses to the Australian Thoroughbred industry, while Equine herpesvirus-1 (EHV-1) is a well-recognized abortigenic agent. Diagnosis of these agents is based on molecular assays in diagnostic laboratories. In this study, we validated C. psittaci and newly developed EHV-1 Loop Mediated Isothermal Amplification (LAMP) assays performed in a real-time fluorometer (rtLAMP) against the reference diagnostic assays. We also evaluated isothermal amplification using commercially available colorimetric mix (cLAMP), and SYBR Green DNA binding dye (sgLAMP) for "naked eye" end-point detection when testing 'real-world' clinical samples. Finally, we applied the C. psittaci LAMP assays in two pilot Point-of-Care (POC) studies in an equine hospital. The analytical sensitivity of C. psittaci and EHV-1 rt-, and colorimetric LAMPs was determined as one and 10 genome equivalents per reaction, respectively. Compared to reference diagnostic qPCR assays, the C. psittaci rtLAMP showed sensitivity of 100%, specificity of 97.5, and 98.86% agreement, while EHV-1 rtLAMP showed 86.96% sensitivity, 100% specificity, and 91.43% agreement. When testing rapidly processed clinical samples, all three C. psittaci rt-, c-, sg-LAMP assays were highly congruent with each other, with Kappa values of 0. 906 for sgLAMP and 0. 821 for cLAMP when compared to rtLAMP. EHV-1 testing also revealed high congruence between the assays, with Kappa values of 0.784 for cLAMP and 0.638 for sgLAMP when compared to rtLAMP. The congruence between LAMP assays and the C. psittaci or EHV-1 qPCR assays was high, with agreements ranging from 94.12 to 100% for C. psittaci, and 88.24 to 94.12% for EHV-1, respectively. At the POC, the C. psittaci rt- and c-LAMP assays using rapidly processed swabs were performed by technicians with no prior molecular experience, and the overall congruence between the POC C. psittaci LAMPs and the qPCR assays ranged between 90.91-100%. This study describes reliable POC options for the detection of the equine pathogens: C. psittaci and EHV-1. Testing 'real-world' samples in equine clinical setting, represents a proof-of-concept that POC isothermal diagnostics can be applied to rapid disease screening in the equine industry.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
C. psittaci has recently emerged as an equine abortigenic pathogen causing significant losses to the Australian Thoroughbred industry, while Equine herpesvirus-1 (EHV-1) is a well-recognized abortigenic agent. Diagnosis of these agents is based on molecular assays in diagnostic laboratories. In this study, we validated C. psittaci and newly developed EHV-1 Loop Mediated Isothermal Amplification (LAMP) assays performed in a real-time fluorometer (rtLAMP) against the reference diagnostic assays. We also evaluated isothermal amplification using commercially available colorimetric mix (cLAMP), and SYBR Green DNA binding dye (sgLAMP) for "naked eye" end-point detection when testing 'real-world' clinical samples. Finally, we applied the C. psittaci LAMP assays in two pilot Point-of-Care (POC) studies in an equine hospital.
RESULTS
RESULTS
The analytical sensitivity of C. psittaci and EHV-1 rt-, and colorimetric LAMPs was determined as one and 10 genome equivalents per reaction, respectively. Compared to reference diagnostic qPCR assays, the C. psittaci rtLAMP showed sensitivity of 100%, specificity of 97.5, and 98.86% agreement, while EHV-1 rtLAMP showed 86.96% sensitivity, 100% specificity, and 91.43% agreement. When testing rapidly processed clinical samples, all three C. psittaci rt-, c-, sg-LAMP assays were highly congruent with each other, with Kappa values of 0. 906 for sgLAMP and 0. 821 for cLAMP when compared to rtLAMP. EHV-1 testing also revealed high congruence between the assays, with Kappa values of 0.784 for cLAMP and 0.638 for sgLAMP when compared to rtLAMP. The congruence between LAMP assays and the C. psittaci or EHV-1 qPCR assays was high, with agreements ranging from 94.12 to 100% for C. psittaci, and 88.24 to 94.12% for EHV-1, respectively. At the POC, the C. psittaci rt- and c-LAMP assays using rapidly processed swabs were performed by technicians with no prior molecular experience, and the overall congruence between the POC C. psittaci LAMPs and the qPCR assays ranged between 90.91-100%.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
This study describes reliable POC options for the detection of the equine pathogens: C. psittaci and EHV-1. Testing 'real-world' samples in equine clinical setting, represents a proof-of-concept that POC isothermal diagnostics can be applied to rapid disease screening in the equine industry.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34412635
doi: 10.1186/s12917-021-02986-8
pii: 10.1186/s12917-021-02986-8
pmc: PMC8375077
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
279Subventions
Organisme : Agrifutures Australia
ID : PRJ-011174
Organisme : Australian Research Council
ID : DE190100238
Informations de copyright
© 2021. The Author(s).
Références
Vet Sci. 2020 Feb 29;7(1):
pubmed: 32121327
J Vet Diagn Invest. 2010 Jan;22(1):30-6
pubmed: 20093679
J Appl Microbiol. 2018 Mar;124(3):626-643
pubmed: 29165905
BMC Vet Res. 2017 Mar 23;13(1):75
pubmed: 28335829
Front Vet Sci. 2019 Mar 08;6:67
pubmed: 30906742
J Vet Med Sci. 2014 Sep;76(9):1271-5
pubmed: 24871644
BMC Infect Dis. 2019 Aug 1;19(1):676
pubmed: 31370782
Transbound Emerg Dis. 2018 Jun;65(3):911-915
pubmed: 29352509
Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 2017 Oct;36(10):1717-1731
pubmed: 28573472
PLoS One. 2017 Sep 25;12(9):e0185340
pubmed: 28945787
Anim Health Res Rev. 2015 Dec;16(2):89-106
pubmed: 25900363
PLoS One. 2020 May 26;15(5):e0233100
pubmed: 32453753
J Vet Diagn Invest. 2019 Jul;31(4):640-644
pubmed: 31170890
Aust Vet J. 2020 Nov;98(11):570-573
pubmed: 32830314
One Health. 2017 Feb 24;3:29-33
pubmed: 28616500
Microorganisms. 2019 Nov 22;7(12):
pubmed: 31766703
Lab Chip. 2020 May 5;20(9):1621-1627
pubmed: 32334422
J Vet Diagn Invest. 2015 Nov;27(6):673-87
pubmed: 26472746
Anal Chem. 2019 Jan 15;91(2):1247-1253
pubmed: 30537809
J Vet Med Sci. 2011 Sep;73(9):1225-7
pubmed: 21551979
Turk J Med Sci. 2020 Mar 10;50(4):1069-1075
pubmed: 32151124
Sensors (Basel). 2020 Aug 22;20(17):
pubmed: 32842600
Aust Vet J. 2019 Oct;97(10):401-403
pubmed: 31286490
Front Microbiol. 2019 Dec 03;10:2668
pubmed: 31849857
Equine Vet J. 2014 Nov;46(6):654-60
pubmed: 24802183
J Equine Vet Sci. 2020 Apr;87:102923
pubmed: 32172913
J Clin Microbiol. 2000 Mar;38(3):1085-93
pubmed: 10699002
Environ Sci Technol. 2008 Jul 15;42(14):5229-34
pubmed: 18754373
FEMS Immunol Med Microbiol. 2011 Jun;62(1):41-8
pubmed: 21276085
Emerg Microbes Infect. 2018 May 16;7(1):88
pubmed: 29765033
PeerJ. 2017 Sep 8;5:e3799
pubmed: 28929022
J Microbiol. 2015 Jan;53(1):1-5
pubmed: 25557475
J Virol Methods. 2006 Jan;131(1):92-8
pubmed: 16137772