Previous Article | Next Article ![]()
Journal of Clinical Microbiology, May 2004, p. 2108-2114, Vol. 42, No. 5
0095-1137/04/$08.00+0 DOI: 10.1128/JCM.42.5.2108-2114.2004
Copyright © 2004, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.
R. P. Kitching,3,
and K. L. Morgan1
Department of Veterinary Clinical Sciences, University of Liverpool, Leahurst Veterinary Teaching Hospital, Neston, Wirral CH64 7TE,1 Institute of Animal Health, Pirbright, Woking, Surrey GU24 0NF, United Kingdom,3 Institute of Agricultural Research for Development, Regional Centre of Wakwa, Ngaoundere, Cameroon,4 Danish Veterinary Institute, Virology Department, Lindholm, DK4771 Kalvehave, Denmark2
Received 15 August 2003/ Returned for modification 3 November 2003/ Accepted 11 January 2004
The development of a serological test for foot-and-mouth disease virus (FMDV) which is quick and easy to use, which can identify all seven serotypes, and which can differentiate vaccinated from convalescing or potential virus carriers would be a major advance in the epidemiological toolkit for FMDV. The nonstructural polyprotein 3ABC has recently been proposed as such an antigen, and a number of diagnostic tests are being developed. This paper evaluates the performance of two FMDV tests for antibodies to nonstructural proteins in an unvaccinated cattle population from a region of Cameroon with endemic multiple-serotype FMD. The CHEKIT-FMD-3ABC bo-ov (CHEKIT) enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) (Bommeli Diagnostics/Intervet) is a commercially available test that was compared with a competitive 3ABC ELISA (C-ELISA) developed in Denmark. The tests were compared with the virus neutralization test as the "gold standard." Diagnostic sensitivity and specificity were examined over a range of test cutoffs by using receiver operating characteristic curves, which allowed comparison of the overall performance of each test. The results indicated that the CHEKIT ELISA kit was 23% sensitive and 98% specific and the Danish C-ELISA was 71% sensitive and 90% specific at the recommended cutoff. These results have important implications if the tests are to be used to screen herds or individual cattle in surveillance programs, at border crossings for import-export clearance, or following emergency vaccination in an outbreak situation.
Present address: National Centre for Foreign Animal Disease, Canadian Food Inspection Agency, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada.
Present address: Institute of Agricultural Research for Development, Regional Centre of Bambui, Bamenda, Cameroon.
This article has been cited by other articles:
Copyright © 2009 by the American Society for Microbiology. For an alternate route to Journals.ASM.org, visit: http://intl-journals.asm.org | More Info»