Commercially Available Enzyme‐Linked Immunosorbent Assay and Polymerase Chain Reaction Tests for Detection of Feline Immunodeficiency Virus Infection

Background Feline immunodeficiency virus (FIV) infection is an important cause of disease of cats worldwide. Initial screening is commonly performed by commercially available point‐of‐care (POC) ELISA tests. Confirmatory testing for positive POC test results is recommended. Polymerase chain reaction...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of veterinary internal medicine 2017-01, Vol.31 (1), p.55-59
Hauptverfasser: Nichols, J., Weng, H.Y., Litster, A., Leutenegger, C., Guptill, L.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 59
container_issue 1
container_start_page 55
container_title Journal of veterinary internal medicine
container_volume 31
creator Nichols, J.
Weng, H.Y.
Litster, A.
Leutenegger, C.
Guptill, L.
description Background Feline immunodeficiency virus (FIV) infection is an important cause of disease of cats worldwide. Initial screening is commonly performed by commercially available point‐of‐care (POC) ELISA tests. Confirmatory testing for positive POC test results is recommended. Polymerase chain reaction (PCR) tests for FIV are commonly used additional testing methods; however, reported measures of diagnostic accuracy vary widely between PCR tests, making interpretation of results difficult. Hypothesis/Objective There is very good agreement between results of a commercially available PCR test and a POC ELISA test for FIV for specimens collected from owned and shelter‐housed cats. Animals Blood samples from 168 cats from 2 adoption guarantee shelters, an FIV Sanctuary, and 64 private homes were used. Methods This was a prospective study. Whole blood samples were collected in K2‐EDTA, divided, and submitted for PCR and ELISA testing. Follow‐up whole blood samples were collected in lithium heparin from cats with discordant results and submitted for virus isolation (VI). Results There was very good agreement between ELISA and PCR (kappa 0.87; P < .001; 95% CI 0.79, 0.95). Of 168 cats, eleven had discordant ELISA/PCR results: 7 ELISA+/PCR‐ and 4 ELISA‐/PCR+. Using VI as a reference standard, there were 4 false‐positive PCR results, 5 false‐positive ELISA results, and 1 false‐negative PCR result (1 cat lost to follow‐up). Conclusions and Clinical Importance While there was good agreement between the POC ELISA and PCR tests, the discordant results highlight the importance of cautious interpretation of test results and the necessity of confirmatory testing.
doi_str_mv 10.1111/jvim.14579
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_5259642</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2000483993</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4539-d168850b28c279e06c6be51632766da3cf2eb66d338615363d46fc84a5f940fa3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkc1uEzEURkcIRNPChgdAXiKkFP-MPZ4NUhRaCAoCodKt5fFcUxePXewkaLriEdjxfjwJLhMq2IA31_I9OvKnr6oeEXxMynl2uXPDMal5096pZqRl7ZyIRtytZli2ZC5EjQ-qw5wvMaac8-Z-dUAbKSiVclZ9X8ZhgGSc9n5Ei512Xnce0Em4Hgf48fXb2oVP0KPVMGxDzDF1EDZokbMekQ49ehd94ZLOgJYX2gX0HrTZuBjQGeRNRjYm9AI2ML1Fi07BuwB7Xw_WGQfBjOjcpW1Gq2An9EF1z2qf4eF-HlUfTk_Olq_m67cvV8vFem5qXoL2REjJcUeloU0LWBjRASeC0UaIXjNjKXTlxpgUhDPB-lpYI2vNbVtjq9lR9XzyXm27AXpT0iXt1VVyg06jitqpvzfBXaiPcac45a2oaRE82QtS_LwtmdXgsgHvdYC4zYpijGvJ2pb9FyWyJk1bqiEFfTqhJsWcE9jbHxGsbkpXN6WrX6UX-PGfGW7R3y0XgEzAF-dh_IdKvT5fvZmkPwEXxbwl</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1841797861</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Commercially Available Enzyme‐Linked Immunosorbent Assay and Polymerase Chain Reaction Tests for Detection of Feline Immunodeficiency Virus Infection</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</source><source>Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete</source><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><source>Wiley Online Library Open Access</source><source>PubMed Central</source><creator>Nichols, J. ; Weng, H.Y. ; Litster, A. ; Leutenegger, C. ; Guptill, L.</creator><creatorcontrib>Nichols, J. ; Weng, H.Y. ; Litster, A. ; Leutenegger, C. ; Guptill, L.</creatorcontrib><description>Background Feline immunodeficiency virus (FIV) infection is an important cause of disease of cats worldwide. Initial screening is commonly performed by commercially available point‐of‐care (POC) ELISA tests. Confirmatory testing for positive POC test results is recommended. Polymerase chain reaction (PCR) tests for FIV are commonly used additional testing methods; however, reported measures of diagnostic accuracy vary widely between PCR tests, making interpretation of results difficult. Hypothesis/Objective There is very good agreement between results of a commercially available PCR test and a POC ELISA test for FIV for specimens collected from owned and shelter‐housed cats. Animals Blood samples from 168 cats from 2 adoption guarantee shelters, an FIV Sanctuary, and 64 private homes were used. Methods This was a prospective study. Whole blood samples were collected in K2‐EDTA, divided, and submitted for PCR and ELISA testing. Follow‐up whole blood samples were collected in lithium heparin from cats with discordant results and submitted for virus isolation (VI). Results There was very good agreement between ELISA and PCR (kappa 0.87; P &lt; .001; 95% CI 0.79, 0.95). Of 168 cats, eleven had discordant ELISA/PCR results: 7 ELISA+/PCR‐ and 4 ELISA‐/PCR+. Using VI as a reference standard, there were 4 false‐positive PCR results, 5 false‐positive ELISA results, and 1 false‐negative PCR result (1 cat lost to follow‐up). Conclusions and Clinical Importance While there was good agreement between the POC ELISA and PCR tests, the discordant results highlight the importance of cautious interpretation of test results and the necessity of confirmatory testing.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0891-6640</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1939-1676</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/jvim.14579</identifier><identifier>PMID: 27862288</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: John Wiley and Sons Inc</publisher><subject>Animals ; blood sampling ; Cat Diseases - virology ; Cats ; Diagnosis ; enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay ; Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay - veterinary ; Feline immunodeficiency virus ; Female ; heparin ; Immunodeficiency Virus, Feline - isolation &amp; purification ; Infectious disease ; lithium ; Longitudinal Studies ; Male ; point-of-care systems ; polymerase chain reaction ; Prospective Studies ; Reagent Kits, Diagnostic - veterinary ; Real-Time Polymerase Chain Reaction - veterinary ; reference standards ; Retroviridae Infections - veterinary ; Retroviridae Infections - virology ; Retrovirus ; screening ; Sensitivity and Specificity ; SMALL ANIMAL ; viruses</subject><ispartof>Journal of veterinary internal medicine, 2017-01, Vol.31 (1), p.55-59</ispartof><rights>Copyright © 2016 The Authors. Journal of Veterinary Internal Medicine published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of the American College of Veterinary Internal Medicine.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4539-d168850b28c279e06c6be51632766da3cf2eb66d338615363d46fc84a5f940fa3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4539-d168850b28c279e06c6be51632766da3cf2eb66d338615363d46fc84a5f940fa3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5259642/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5259642/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,723,776,780,860,881,1411,11542,27903,27904,45553,45554,46030,46454,53769,53771</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27862288$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Nichols, J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Weng, H.Y.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Litster, A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Leutenegger, C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Guptill, L.</creatorcontrib><title>Commercially Available Enzyme‐Linked Immunosorbent Assay and Polymerase Chain Reaction Tests for Detection of Feline Immunodeficiency Virus Infection</title><title>Journal of veterinary internal medicine</title><addtitle>J Vet Intern Med</addtitle><description>Background Feline immunodeficiency virus (FIV) infection is an important cause of disease of cats worldwide. Initial screening is commonly performed by commercially available point‐of‐care (POC) ELISA tests. Confirmatory testing for positive POC test results is recommended. Polymerase chain reaction (PCR) tests for FIV are commonly used additional testing methods; however, reported measures of diagnostic accuracy vary widely between PCR tests, making interpretation of results difficult. Hypothesis/Objective There is very good agreement between results of a commercially available PCR test and a POC ELISA test for FIV for specimens collected from owned and shelter‐housed cats. Animals Blood samples from 168 cats from 2 adoption guarantee shelters, an FIV Sanctuary, and 64 private homes were used. Methods This was a prospective study. Whole blood samples were collected in K2‐EDTA, divided, and submitted for PCR and ELISA testing. Follow‐up whole blood samples were collected in lithium heparin from cats with discordant results and submitted for virus isolation (VI). Results There was very good agreement between ELISA and PCR (kappa 0.87; P &lt; .001; 95% CI 0.79, 0.95). Of 168 cats, eleven had discordant ELISA/PCR results: 7 ELISA+/PCR‐ and 4 ELISA‐/PCR+. Using VI as a reference standard, there were 4 false‐positive PCR results, 5 false‐positive ELISA results, and 1 false‐negative PCR result (1 cat lost to follow‐up). Conclusions and Clinical Importance While there was good agreement between the POC ELISA and PCR tests, the discordant results highlight the importance of cautious interpretation of test results and the necessity of confirmatory testing.</description><subject>Animals</subject><subject>blood sampling</subject><subject>Cat Diseases - virology</subject><subject>Cats</subject><subject>Diagnosis</subject><subject>enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay</subject><subject>Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay - veterinary</subject><subject>Feline immunodeficiency virus</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>heparin</subject><subject>Immunodeficiency Virus, Feline - isolation &amp; purification</subject><subject>Infectious disease</subject><subject>lithium</subject><subject>Longitudinal Studies</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>point-of-care systems</subject><subject>polymerase chain reaction</subject><subject>Prospective Studies</subject><subject>Reagent Kits, Diagnostic - veterinary</subject><subject>Real-Time Polymerase Chain Reaction - veterinary</subject><subject>reference standards</subject><subject>Retroviridae Infections - veterinary</subject><subject>Retroviridae Infections - virology</subject><subject>Retrovirus</subject><subject>screening</subject><subject>Sensitivity and Specificity</subject><subject>SMALL ANIMAL</subject><subject>viruses</subject><issn>0891-6640</issn><issn>1939-1676</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2017</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>24P</sourceid><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkc1uEzEURkcIRNPChgdAXiKkFP-MPZ4NUhRaCAoCodKt5fFcUxePXewkaLriEdjxfjwJLhMq2IA31_I9OvKnr6oeEXxMynl2uXPDMal5096pZqRl7ZyIRtytZli2ZC5EjQ-qw5wvMaac8-Z-dUAbKSiVclZ9X8ZhgGSc9n5Ei512Xnce0Em4Hgf48fXb2oVP0KPVMGxDzDF1EDZokbMekQ49ehd94ZLOgJYX2gX0HrTZuBjQGeRNRjYm9AI2ML1Fi07BuwB7Xw_WGQfBjOjcpW1Gq2An9EF1z2qf4eF-HlUfTk_Olq_m67cvV8vFem5qXoL2REjJcUeloU0LWBjRASeC0UaIXjNjKXTlxpgUhDPB-lpYI2vNbVtjq9lR9XzyXm27AXpT0iXt1VVyg06jitqpvzfBXaiPcac45a2oaRE82QtS_LwtmdXgsgHvdYC4zYpijGvJ2pb9FyWyJk1bqiEFfTqhJsWcE9jbHxGsbkpXN6WrX6UX-PGfGW7R3y0XgEzAF-dh_IdKvT5fvZmkPwEXxbwl</recordid><startdate>201701</startdate><enddate>201701</enddate><creator>Nichols, J.</creator><creator>Weng, H.Y.</creator><creator>Litster, A.</creator><creator>Leutenegger, C.</creator><creator>Guptill, L.</creator><general>John Wiley and Sons Inc</general><scope>24P</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>7S9</scope><scope>L.6</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201701</creationdate><title>Commercially Available Enzyme‐Linked Immunosorbent Assay and Polymerase Chain Reaction Tests for Detection of Feline Immunodeficiency Virus Infection</title><author>Nichols, J. ; Weng, H.Y. ; Litster, A. ; Leutenegger, C. ; Guptill, L.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4539-d168850b28c279e06c6be51632766da3cf2eb66d338615363d46fc84a5f940fa3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2017</creationdate><topic>Animals</topic><topic>blood sampling</topic><topic>Cat Diseases - virology</topic><topic>Cats</topic><topic>Diagnosis</topic><topic>enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay</topic><topic>Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay - veterinary</topic><topic>Feline immunodeficiency virus</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>heparin</topic><topic>Immunodeficiency Virus, Feline - isolation &amp; purification</topic><topic>Infectious disease</topic><topic>lithium</topic><topic>Longitudinal Studies</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>point-of-care systems</topic><topic>polymerase chain reaction</topic><topic>Prospective Studies</topic><topic>Reagent Kits, Diagnostic - veterinary</topic><topic>Real-Time Polymerase Chain Reaction - veterinary</topic><topic>reference standards</topic><topic>Retroviridae Infections - veterinary</topic><topic>Retroviridae Infections - virology</topic><topic>Retrovirus</topic><topic>screening</topic><topic>Sensitivity and Specificity</topic><topic>SMALL ANIMAL</topic><topic>viruses</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Nichols, J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Weng, H.Y.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Litster, A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Leutenegger, C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Guptill, L.</creatorcontrib><collection>Wiley Online Library Open Access</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>AGRICOLA</collection><collection>AGRICOLA - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Journal of veterinary internal medicine</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Nichols, J.</au><au>Weng, H.Y.</au><au>Litster, A.</au><au>Leutenegger, C.</au><au>Guptill, L.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Commercially Available Enzyme‐Linked Immunosorbent Assay and Polymerase Chain Reaction Tests for Detection of Feline Immunodeficiency Virus Infection</atitle><jtitle>Journal of veterinary internal medicine</jtitle><addtitle>J Vet Intern Med</addtitle><date>2017-01</date><risdate>2017</risdate><volume>31</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>55</spage><epage>59</epage><pages>55-59</pages><issn>0891-6640</issn><eissn>1939-1676</eissn><abstract>Background Feline immunodeficiency virus (FIV) infection is an important cause of disease of cats worldwide. Initial screening is commonly performed by commercially available point‐of‐care (POC) ELISA tests. Confirmatory testing for positive POC test results is recommended. Polymerase chain reaction (PCR) tests for FIV are commonly used additional testing methods; however, reported measures of diagnostic accuracy vary widely between PCR tests, making interpretation of results difficult. Hypothesis/Objective There is very good agreement between results of a commercially available PCR test and a POC ELISA test for FIV for specimens collected from owned and shelter‐housed cats. Animals Blood samples from 168 cats from 2 adoption guarantee shelters, an FIV Sanctuary, and 64 private homes were used. Methods This was a prospective study. Whole blood samples were collected in K2‐EDTA, divided, and submitted for PCR and ELISA testing. Follow‐up whole blood samples were collected in lithium heparin from cats with discordant results and submitted for virus isolation (VI). Results There was very good agreement between ELISA and PCR (kappa 0.87; P &lt; .001; 95% CI 0.79, 0.95). Of 168 cats, eleven had discordant ELISA/PCR results: 7 ELISA+/PCR‐ and 4 ELISA‐/PCR+. Using VI as a reference standard, there were 4 false‐positive PCR results, 5 false‐positive ELISA results, and 1 false‐negative PCR result (1 cat lost to follow‐up). Conclusions and Clinical Importance While there was good agreement between the POC ELISA and PCR tests, the discordant results highlight the importance of cautious interpretation of test results and the necessity of confirmatory testing.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>John Wiley and Sons Inc</pub><pmid>27862288</pmid><doi>10.1111/jvim.14579</doi><tpages>5</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0891-6640
ispartof Journal of veterinary internal medicine, 2017-01, Vol.31 (1), p.55-59
issn 0891-6640
1939-1676
language eng
recordid cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_5259642
source MEDLINE; DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals; Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete; Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals; Wiley Online Library Open Access; PubMed Central
subjects Animals
blood sampling
Cat Diseases - virology
Cats
Diagnosis
enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay
Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay - veterinary
Feline immunodeficiency virus
Female
heparin
Immunodeficiency Virus, Feline - isolation & purification
Infectious disease
lithium
Longitudinal Studies
Male
point-of-care systems
polymerase chain reaction
Prospective Studies
Reagent Kits, Diagnostic - veterinary
Real-Time Polymerase Chain Reaction - veterinary
reference standards
Retroviridae Infections - veterinary
Retroviridae Infections - virology
Retrovirus
screening
Sensitivity and Specificity
SMALL ANIMAL
viruses
title Commercially Available Enzyme‐Linked Immunosorbent Assay and Polymerase Chain Reaction Tests for Detection of Feline Immunodeficiency Virus Infection
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-26T22%3A30%3A04IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Commercially%20Available%20Enzyme%E2%80%90Linked%20Immunosorbent%20Assay%20and%20Polymerase%20Chain%20Reaction%20Tests%20for%20Detection%20of%20Feline%20Immunodeficiency%20Virus%20Infection&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20veterinary%20internal%20medicine&rft.au=Nichols,%20J.&rft.date=2017-01&rft.volume=31&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=55&rft.epage=59&rft.pages=55-59&rft.issn=0891-6640&rft.eissn=1939-1676&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/jvim.14579&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E2000483993%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1841797861&rft_id=info:pmid/27862288&rfr_iscdi=true