Why the study?
How do 16 commercial ELISAs compare to the virus neutralization test for detecting BVDV-specific antibodies in bovine serum and milk?
How do 16 commercial ELISAs compare to the virus neutralization test for detecting BVDV-specific antibodies in bovine serum and milk?
Indirect ELISAs demonstrate higher diagnostic sensitivity than competitive ELISAs for detecting BVDV antibodies, and serum from unvaccinated animals is recommended for optimal serologic monitoring of herds.
This is the authors' abstract. We don't add key points for this paper.
We performed a thorough fit-for-purpose evaluation of commercial ELISAs for the detection of bovine viral diarrhea virus (BVDV)-specific antibodies in serum and in milk by testing 2 panels of well-characterized serum and milk samples. Sixteen ELISAs from 9 different manufacturers, available on the Belgian market at the time of our study, were assessed for their diagnostic and analytical sensitivity (DSe and ASe, respectively), diagnostic specificity (DSp), and repeatability relative to the virus neutralization (VN) test considered to be the gold standard assay. Using serum as a matrix, DSe was much lower for competitive (c)ELISAs (min. 45%, max. 65%) than for indirect (i)ELISAs (min. 85%, max. 100%), partly because of the lower detection of positive samples from vaccinated animals included in the panel. ASe was also better for iELISAs; DSp was >95% for all but 2 ELISAs. Repeatability, expressed as coefficients of variation (CV) of optical densities, was generally good, although 3 ELISAs had a mean CV >10%. With milk samples, as observed for serum, DSe was lower for cELISAs (min. 57%, max. 75%) than for iELISAs (min. 61%, max. 89%), and DSp was high for all ELISAs (min. 94%, max. 100%). Both DSe and ASe were lower when testing milk samples compared to serum samples. These results confirm that serologic monitoring of BVDV-free herds should be performed using serum samples of unvaccinated animals to avoid interference of vaccination and to maximize the chance of detecting seroconversion linked to BVDV infection. Further investigations using a larger collection of field samples are recommended.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
May favor indirect ELISAs for BVDV serosurveillance in cattle; leaves open performance in vaccinated herds and milk matrices.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hanon et al. (2017) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: