用于检测狗体内幼年利什曼病抗体的四种商用血清学试验的比较

IF 2 2区 农林科学 Q2 PARASITOLOGY
Andrea Murillo-Picco , Sandra Gascón-Torrens , Massimiliano Baratelli , Lourdes Alarcón , Marta Baxarias , Tamara Rivero , Laia Solano-Gallego
{"title":"用于检测狗体内幼年利什曼病抗体的四种商用血清学试验的比较","authors":"Andrea Murillo-Picco ,&nbsp;Sandra Gascón-Torrens ,&nbsp;Massimiliano Baratelli ,&nbsp;Lourdes Alarcón ,&nbsp;Marta Baxarias ,&nbsp;Tamara Rivero ,&nbsp;Laia Solano-Gallego","doi":"10.1016/j.vetpar.2025.110397","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Early detection and treatment of cases of <em>Leishmania infantum</em> infection are critical in controlling the spread of the disease in dogs. Several serological methods are available to support the diagnosis of canine leishmaniosis. The immunofluorescence antibody test (IFAT) and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) are the main tests used by clinicians. High antibody levels are associated with severe parasitism and disease and are diagnostic of clinical leishmaniosis. Conversely, the presence of low antibody levels is not necessarily indicative of disease and may be more difficult to detect by serological tests. The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the diagnostic performance of four commercially available serological tests, including ELISAs (CIVTEST® CANIS LEISHMANIA short and standard protocols), LEISHMANIA-ELISA DOG®, ELISA/S7® and MegaFLUO®LEISH IFAT, for the detection of specific antibodies against <em>L. infantum</em> antigens in dogs in different states of infection. Canine sera samples from seropositive sick infected dogs (<em>n</em> = 75), seropositive apparently healthy dogs (<em>n</em> = 48), and seronegative apparently healthy dogs from a high endemic area (Cadiz, <em>n</em> = 40) and seronegative apparently healthy dogs from very low endemic area of <em>L. infantum</em> infection (Asturias, <em>n</em> = 40) were classified based on the results of an <em>in-house</em> UAB ELISA as a reference test. The positive percent of agreement (PPA) and negative percent of agreement (NPA) observed for each test were as follows: CIVTEST® standard (93.4 %, 100 %) on 202 samples tested, CIVTEST® short (84.4 %, 100 %) on 202 samples tested, LEISHMANIA-ELISA DOG® (81.8 %, 72.2 %) on 138 samples tested, ELISA/S7® (34.8 %, 45 %) on 195 samples tested and MegaFLUO®LEISH IFAT (100 %, 100 %) on 203 samples tested, respectively. The accuracy was as follows: CIVTEST® standard (0.96), CIVTEST® short (0.91), LEISHMANIA-ELISA DOG® (0.77), ELISA/S7® (0.39), and MegaFLUO®LEISH IFAT (1). The Cohen´s Kappa index (<em>K</em>) from best to worst was: MegaFLUO®LEISH IFAT (<em>K</em> = 1), CIVTEST® standard (<em>K</em> = 0.92), CIVTEST® short (<em>K</em>=0.81), LEISHMANIA-ELISA DOG® (<em>K</em> =0.54), and ELISA/S7® (<em>K</em>=-0.19). Finally, the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC-ROC), in the ELISAs test, ordered from the maximum to the minimum value was: CIVTEST® short (1), CIVTEST® standard (0.99), LEISHMANIA-ELISA DOG® (0.87), and S7® (0.37). In conclusion, this study demonstrated that the diagnostic performance of the commercially available ELISA tests against <em>L. infantum</em> antigen can vary widely. Moreover, it highlights the fact that CIVTEST® CANIS LEISHMANIA is a reliable test to support the diagnosis of canine leishmaniosis in clinical settings.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":23716,"journal":{"name":"Veterinary parasitology","volume":"334 ","pages":"Article 110397"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of four commercial serological tests for the detection of Leishmania infantum antibodies in dogs\",\"authors\":\"Andrea Murillo-Picco ,&nbsp;Sandra Gascón-Torrens ,&nbsp;Massimiliano Baratelli ,&nbsp;Lourdes Alarcón ,&nbsp;Marta Baxarias ,&nbsp;Tamara Rivero ,&nbsp;Laia Solano-Gallego\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.vetpar.2025.110397\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Early detection and treatment of cases of <em>Leishmania infantum</em> infection are critical in controlling the spread of the disease in dogs. Several serological methods are available to support the diagnosis of canine leishmaniosis. The immunofluorescence antibody test (IFAT) and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) are the main tests used by clinicians. High antibody levels are associated with severe parasitism and disease and are diagnostic of clinical leishmaniosis. Conversely, the presence of low antibody levels is not necessarily indicative of disease and may be more difficult to detect by serological tests. The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the diagnostic performance of four commercially available serological tests, including ELISAs (CIVTEST® CANIS LEISHMANIA short and standard protocols), LEISHMANIA-ELISA DOG®, ELISA/S7® and MegaFLUO®LEISH IFAT, for the detection of specific antibodies against <em>L. infantum</em> antigens in dogs in different states of infection. Canine sera samples from seropositive sick infected dogs (<em>n</em> = 75), seropositive apparently healthy dogs (<em>n</em> = 48), and seronegative apparently healthy dogs from a high endemic area (Cadiz, <em>n</em> = 40) and seronegative apparently healthy dogs from very low endemic area of <em>L. infantum</em> infection (Asturias, <em>n</em> = 40) were classified based on the results of an <em>in-house</em> UAB ELISA as a reference test. The positive percent of agreement (PPA) and negative percent of agreement (NPA) observed for each test were as follows: CIVTEST® standard (93.4 %, 100 %) on 202 samples tested, CIVTEST® short (84.4 %, 100 %) on 202 samples tested, LEISHMANIA-ELISA DOG® (81.8 %, 72.2 %) on 138 samples tested, ELISA/S7® (34.8 %, 45 %) on 195 samples tested and MegaFLUO®LEISH IFAT (100 %, 100 %) on 203 samples tested, respectively. The accuracy was as follows: CIVTEST® standard (0.96), CIVTEST® short (0.91), LEISHMANIA-ELISA DOG® (0.77), ELISA/S7® (0.39), and MegaFLUO®LEISH IFAT (1). The Cohen´s Kappa index (<em>K</em>) from best to worst was: MegaFLUO®LEISH IFAT (<em>K</em> = 1), CIVTEST® standard (<em>K</em> = 0.92), CIVTEST® short (<em>K</em>=0.81), LEISHMANIA-ELISA DOG® (<em>K</em> =0.54), and ELISA/S7® (<em>K</em>=-0.19). Finally, the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC-ROC), in the ELISAs test, ordered from the maximum to the minimum value was: CIVTEST® short (1), CIVTEST® standard (0.99), LEISHMANIA-ELISA DOG® (0.87), and S7® (0.37). In conclusion, this study demonstrated that the diagnostic performance of the commercially available ELISA tests against <em>L. infantum</em> antigen can vary widely. Moreover, it highlights the fact that CIVTEST® CANIS LEISHMANIA is a reliable test to support the diagnosis of canine leishmaniosis in clinical settings.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":23716,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Veterinary parasitology\",\"volume\":\"334 \",\"pages\":\"Article 110397\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Veterinary parasitology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"97\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304401725000081\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"农林科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PARASITOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Veterinary parasitology","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304401725000081","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PARASITOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparison of four commercial serological tests for the detection of Leishmania infantum antibodies in dogs
Early detection and treatment of cases of Leishmania infantum infection are critical in controlling the spread of the disease in dogs. Several serological methods are available to support the diagnosis of canine leishmaniosis. The immunofluorescence antibody test (IFAT) and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) are the main tests used by clinicians. High antibody levels are associated with severe parasitism and disease and are diagnostic of clinical leishmaniosis. Conversely, the presence of low antibody levels is not necessarily indicative of disease and may be more difficult to detect by serological tests. The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the diagnostic performance of four commercially available serological tests, including ELISAs (CIVTEST® CANIS LEISHMANIA short and standard protocols), LEISHMANIA-ELISA DOG®, ELISA/S7® and MegaFLUO®LEISH IFAT, for the detection of specific antibodies against L. infantum antigens in dogs in different states of infection. Canine sera samples from seropositive sick infected dogs (n = 75), seropositive apparently healthy dogs (n = 48), and seronegative apparently healthy dogs from a high endemic area (Cadiz, n = 40) and seronegative apparently healthy dogs from very low endemic area of L. infantum infection (Asturias, n = 40) were classified based on the results of an in-house UAB ELISA as a reference test. The positive percent of agreement (PPA) and negative percent of agreement (NPA) observed for each test were as follows: CIVTEST® standard (93.4 %, 100 %) on 202 samples tested, CIVTEST® short (84.4 %, 100 %) on 202 samples tested, LEISHMANIA-ELISA DOG® (81.8 %, 72.2 %) on 138 samples tested, ELISA/S7® (34.8 %, 45 %) on 195 samples tested and MegaFLUO®LEISH IFAT (100 %, 100 %) on 203 samples tested, respectively. The accuracy was as follows: CIVTEST® standard (0.96), CIVTEST® short (0.91), LEISHMANIA-ELISA DOG® (0.77), ELISA/S7® (0.39), and MegaFLUO®LEISH IFAT (1). The Cohen´s Kappa index (K) from best to worst was: MegaFLUO®LEISH IFAT (K = 1), CIVTEST® standard (K = 0.92), CIVTEST® short (K=0.81), LEISHMANIA-ELISA DOG® (K =0.54), and ELISA/S7® (K=-0.19). Finally, the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC-ROC), in the ELISAs test, ordered from the maximum to the minimum value was: CIVTEST® short (1), CIVTEST® standard (0.99), LEISHMANIA-ELISA DOG® (0.87), and S7® (0.37). In conclusion, this study demonstrated that the diagnostic performance of the commercially available ELISA tests against L. infantum antigen can vary widely. Moreover, it highlights the fact that CIVTEST® CANIS LEISHMANIA is a reliable test to support the diagnosis of canine leishmaniosis in clinical settings.
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 parasitology
Veterinary parasitology 农林科学-寄生虫学
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
7.70%
发文量
126
审稿时长
36 days
期刊介绍: The journal Veterinary Parasitology has an open access mirror journal,Veterinary Parasitology: X, sharing the same aims and scope, editorial team, submission system and rigorous peer review. This journal is concerned with those aspects of helminthology, protozoology and entomology which are of interest to animal health investigators, veterinary practitioners and others with a special interest in parasitology. Papers of the highest quality dealing with all aspects of disease prevention, pathology, treatment, epidemiology, and control of parasites in all domesticated animals, fall within the scope of the journal. Papers of geographically limited (local) interest which are not of interest to an international audience will not be accepted. Authors who submit papers based on local data will need to indicate why their paper is relevant to a broader readership. Parasitological studies on laboratory animals fall within the scope of the journal only if they provide a reasonably close model of a disease of domestic animals. Additionally the journal will consider papers relating to wildlife species where they may act as disease reservoirs to domestic animals, or as a zoonotic reservoir. Case studies considered to be unique or of specific interest to the journal, will also be considered on occasions at the Editors'' discretion. Papers dealing exclusively with the taxonomy of parasites do not fall within the scope of the journal.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信