An Ibero-American inter-laboratory trial to evaluate serological tests for the detection of anti-<Emphasis Type="Italic">Neospora caninum</Emphasis> antibodies in cattle |
| |
| Authors: | Lucía M Campero Javier Moreno-Gonzalo María C Venturini Gastón Moré Andrea Dellarupe Magdalena Rambeaud Ignacio E Echaide Beatriz Valentini Carlos M Campero Dadín P Moore Dora B Cano Marcelo Fort Rinaldo A Mota Marcos E Serrano-Martínez Carlos Cruz-Vázquez Luis M Ortega-Mora Gema Álvarez-García |
| |
| Institution: | 1.Immunoparasitology Laboratory, School of Veterinary Sciences,National University of La Plata,La Plata,Argentina;2.National Scientific and Technical Research Council,Buenos Aires,Argentina;3.SALUVET, Animal Health Department, Faculty of Veterinary Sciences,Complutense University of Madrid,Madrid,Spain;4.Rafaela Agricultural Experimental Station,National Institute of Agricultural Technology,Santa Fe,Argentina;5.Balcarce Agricultural Experimental Station,National Institute of Agricultural Technology,Buenos Aires,Argentina;6.Anguil Agricultural Experimental Station,National Institute of Agricultural Technology,La Pampa,Argentina;7.Veterinary Medicine Department,Rural Federal University of Pernambuco,Recife,Brazil;8.Veterinary Medicine and Zootechny Faculty,Cayetano Heredia Peruvian University,Lima,Peru;9.El Llano Technical Institute,Aguascalientes,Mexico |
| |
| Abstract: | We carried out an inter-laboratory trial to compare the serological tests commonly used for the detection of specific Neospora caninum antibodies in cattle in Ibero-American countries. A total of eight laboratories participated from the following countries: Argentina (n = 4), Brazil (n = 1), Peru (n = 1), Mexico (n = 1), and Spain (n = 1). A blind panel of well-characterized cattle sera (n = 143) and sera representative of the target population (n = 351) was tested by seven in-house indirect fluorescent antibody tests (IFATs 1–7) and three enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISAs 1–3; two in-house and one commercial). Diagnostic performance of the serological tests was calculated and compared according to the following criteria: (1) the “Pre-test information,” which uses previous epidemiological and serological data; (2) the “Majority of tests,” which classifies a serum as positive or negative according to the results obtained by most tests evaluated. Unexpectedly, six tests showed either sensitivity (Se) or specificity (Sp) values lower than 90%. In contrast, the best tests in terms of Se, Sp, and area under the ROC curve (AUC) values were IFAT 1 and optimized ELISA 1 and ELISA 2. We evaluated a high number of IFATs, which are the most widely used tests in Ibero-America. The significant discordances observed among the tests regardless of the criteria employed hinder control programs and urge the use of a common test or with similar performances to either the optimized IFAT 1 and ELISAs 1 and 2. |
| |
| Keywords: | |
| 本文献已被 SpringerLink 等数据库收录！ |
|
