商用荧光微球免疫测定和三种商用酶联免疫测定在肺炎支原体血清抗体检测中的性能比较评估。

IF 1.4 3区农林科学 Q4 IMMUNOLOGY

Veterinary immunology and immunopathology Pub Date : 2024-09-05 DOI:10.1016/j.vetimm.2024.110826

{"title":"商用荧光微球免疫测定和三种商用酶联免疫测定在肺炎支原体血清抗体检测中的性能比较评估。","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.vetimm.2024.110826","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>Mycoplasma hyopneumoniae (M. hyopneumoniae) is a significant porcine respiratory disease complex pathogen, prompting many swine farms and production systems to pursue M. hyopneumoniae elimination strategies. Antibody testing is cost-effective in demonstrating sustained freedom from M. hyopneumoniae, often replacing PCR testing on deep tracheal swabs. The process typically involves testing a subpopulation of the herd using an M. hyopneumoniae screening antibody ELISA, with non-negative results further assessed through confirmatory testing, such as PCR. Recently, a commercial (Biochek) fluorescent microsphere immunoassay (FMIA) for detecting M. hyopneumoniae antibodies has been introduced as an alternative to ELISA. Its performance was compared to three commercial ELISAs (Idexx, Hipra, and Biochek) using experimental serum samples from pigs inoculated with M. hyopneumoniae, M. hyorhinis, M. hyosynoviae, M. flocculare, or mock-inoculated with Friis medium. FMIA consistently detected M. hyopneumoniae at earlier time points than the ELISAs, although two false-positive results were encountered using the manufacturer’s recommended cutoff. ROC analysis allowed for the evaluation of various cutoffs depending on testing objectives. Poisson regression of misclassification error counts detected no difference in the Biovet FMIA and Hipra ELISA but significantly fewer misclassification errors than Idexx and Biocheck ELISAs. This study showed FMIA as a suitable alternative to traditional ELISAs for screening purposes due to its superior antibody detection rate at early stages. Alternatively, adopting a more stringent cutoff to improve diagnostic specificity could position the FMIA as a viable confirmatory test option. Overall, FMIA is an optimal choice for M. hyopneumoniae antibody surveillance testing, offering versatility in testing strategies (e.g., triplex FMIA M. hyopneumoniae/PRRSV types 1 and 2) and contributing to improved diagnostic capabilities in porcine health management.</div>","PeriodicalId":23511,"journal":{"name":"Veterinary immunology and immunopathology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0165242724001120/pdfft?md5=38da75fd7d7c820cbe5a61d2a2b5e4ed&pid=1-s2.0-S0165242724001120-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparative assessment of the performance of a commercial fluorescent microsphere immunoassay and three commercial ELISAs for Mycoplasma hyopneumoniae serum antibody detection\",\"authors\":\"\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.vetimm.2024.110826\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>Mycoplasma hyopneumoniae (M. hyopneumoniae) is a significant porcine respiratory disease complex pathogen, prompting many swine farms and production systems to pursue M. hyopneumoniae elimination strategies. Antibody testing is cost-effective in demonstrating sustained freedom from M. hyopneumoniae, often replacing PCR testing on deep tracheal swabs. The process typically involves testing a subpopulation of the herd using an M. hyopneumoniae screening antibody ELISA, with non-negative results further assessed through confirmatory testing, such as PCR. Recently, a commercial (Biochek) fluorescent microsphere immunoassay (FMIA) for detecting M. hyopneumoniae antibodies has been introduced as an alternative to ELISA. Its performance was compared to three commercial ELISAs (Idexx, Hipra, and Biochek) using experimental serum samples from pigs inoculated with M. hyopneumoniae, M. hyorhinis, M. hyosynoviae, M. flocculare, or mock-inoculated with Friis medium. FMIA consistently detected M. hyopneumoniae at earlier time points than the ELISAs, although two false-positive results were encountered using the manufacturer’s recommended cutoff. ROC analysis allowed for the evaluation of various cutoffs depending on testing objectives. Poisson regression of misclassification error counts detected no difference in the Biovet FMIA and Hipra ELISA but significantly fewer misclassification errors than Idexx and Biocheck ELISAs. This study showed FMIA as a suitable alternative to traditional ELISAs for screening purposes due to its superior antibody detection rate at early stages. Alternatively, adopting a more stringent cutoff to improve diagnostic specificity could position the FMIA as a viable confirmatory test option. Overall, FMIA is an optimal choice for M. hyopneumoniae antibody surveillance testing, offering versatility in testing strategies (e.g., triplex FMIA M. hyopneumoniae/PRRSV types 1 and 2) and contributing to improved diagnostic capabilities in porcine health management.</div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":23511,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Veterinary immunology and immunopathology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0165242724001120/pdfft?md5=38da75fd7d7c820cbe5a61d2a2b5e4ed&pid=1-s2.0-S0165242724001120-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Veterinary immunology and immunopathology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"97\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0165242724001120\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"农林科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"IMMUNOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Veterinary immunology and immunopathology","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0165242724001120","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"IMMUNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

摘要

支原体肺炎（M. hyopneumoniae）是一种重要的猪呼吸道疾病复合病原体，促使许多猪场和生产系统采取消除支原体肺炎的策略。抗体检测在证明猪群持续不感染 M. hyopneumoniae 方面具有成本效益，通常可取代对气管深部拭子进行的 PCR 检测。这一过程通常包括使用 M. hyopneumoniae 筛选抗体 ELISA 检测牛群中的一个亚群，然后通过 PCR 等确证检测进一步评估非阴性结果。最近，商用（Biochek）荧光微球免疫测定（FMIA）被引入，作为 ELISA 的替代方法。使用接种了猪肺炎霉菌、猪嗜血杆菌、猪嗜血杆菌、猪絮状芽孢杆菌或用弗里斯培养基模拟接种的猪的实验血清样本，将其性能与三种商业 ELISA（Idexx、Hipra 和 Biochek）进行了比较。与酶联免疫吸附法相比，FMIA 能在更早的时间点检测到肺炎双球菌，但在使用制造商推荐的临界值时出现了两个假阳性结果。通过 ROC 分析，可根据检测目标评估不同的临界值。对误判错误计数进行泊松回归后发现，Biovet FMIA 和 Hipra ELISA 没有区别，但误判错误明显少于 Idexx 和 Biocheck ELISA。这项研究表明，由于 FMIA 在早期阶段的抗体检出率较高，因此是传统 ELISA 筛选方法的合适替代品。另外，采用更严格的临界值来提高诊断特异性也可将 FMIA 定位为一种可行的确证检测方法。总之，FMIA 是猪肺炎甲型肝炎抗体监测检测的最佳选择，可提供多种检测策略（如三重 FMIA 猪肺炎甲型肝炎/PRRSV 1 型和 2 型），有助于提高猪健康管理的诊断能力。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

Comparative assessment of the performance of a commercial fluorescent microsphere immunoassay and three commercial ELISAs for Mycoplasma hyopneumoniae serum antibody detection

Mycoplasma hyopneumoniae (M. hyopneumoniae) is a significant porcine respiratory disease complex pathogen, prompting many swine farms and production systems to pursue M. hyopneumoniae elimination strategies. Antibody testing is cost-effective in demonstrating sustained freedom from M. hyopneumoniae, often replacing PCR testing on deep tracheal swabs. The process typically involves testing a subpopulation of the herd using an M. hyopneumoniae screening antibody ELISA, with non-negative results further assessed through confirmatory testing, such as PCR. Recently, a commercial (Biochek) fluorescent microsphere immunoassay (FMIA) for detecting M. hyopneumoniae antibodies has been introduced as an alternative to ELISA. Its performance was compared to three commercial ELISAs (Idexx, Hipra, and Biochek) using experimental serum samples from pigs inoculated with M. hyopneumoniae, M. hyorhinis, M. hyosynoviae, M. flocculare, or mock-inoculated with Friis medium. FMIA consistently detected M. hyopneumoniae at earlier time points than the ELISAs, although two false-positive results were encountered using the manufacturer’s recommended cutoff. ROC analysis allowed for the evaluation of various cutoffs depending on testing objectives. Poisson regression of misclassification error counts detected no difference in the Biovet FMIA and Hipra ELISA but significantly fewer misclassification errors than Idexx and Biocheck ELISAs. This study showed FMIA as a suitable alternative to traditional ELISAs for screening purposes due to its superior antibody detection rate at early stages. Alternatively, adopting a more stringent cutoff to improve diagnostic specificity could position the FMIA as a viable confirmatory test option. Overall, FMIA is an optimal choice for M. hyopneumoniae antibody surveillance testing, offering versatility in testing strategies (e.g., triplex FMIA M. hyopneumoniae/PRRSV types 1 and 2) and contributing to improved diagnostic capabilities in porcine health management.

求助全文

通过发布文献求助，成功后即可免费获取论文全文。去求助

来源期刊

Veterinary immunology and immunopathology 农林科学-免疫学

CiteScore

3.40

自引率

5.60%

发文量

审稿时长

70 days

期刊介绍： The journal reports basic, comparative and clinical immunology as they pertain to the animal species designated here: livestock, poultry, and fish species that are major food animals and companion animals such as cats, dogs, horses and camels, and wildlife species that act as reservoirs for food, companion or human infectious diseases, or as models for human disease. Rodent models of infectious diseases that are of importance in the animal species indicated above,when the disease requires a level of containment that is not readily available for larger animal experimentation (ABSL3), will be considered. Papers on rabbits, lizards, guinea pigs, badgers, armadillos, elephants, antelope, and buffalo will be reviewed if the research advances our fundamental understanding of immunology, or if they act as a reservoir of infectious disease for the primary animal species designated above, or for humans. Manuscripts employing other species will be reviewed if justified as fitting into the categories above. The following topics are appropriate: biology of cells and mechanisms of the immune system, immunochemistry, immunodeficiencies, immunodiagnosis, immunogenetics, immunopathology, immunology of infectious disease and tumors, immunoprophylaxis including vaccine development and delivery, immunological aspects of pregnancy including passive immunity, autoimmuity, neuroimmunology, and transplanatation immunology. Manuscripts that describe new genes and development of tools such as monoclonal antibodies are also of interest when part of a larger biological study. Studies employing extracts or constituents (plant extracts, feed additives or microbiome) must be sufficiently defined to be reproduced in other laboratories and also provide evidence for possible mechanisms and not simply show an effect on the immune system.