An Ibero-American inter-laboratory trial to evaluate serological tests for the detection of anti-Neospora caninum 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 |
| |
Affiliation: | 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! |
|