Article: Performance evaluation of five detection tests for avian influenza antigen with various avian samples

File Download
  • No File Attached
Links for fulltext
(May Require Subscription)
Supplementary
  • Basic View
  • Metadata View
  • XML View
TitlePerformance evaluation of five detection tests for avian influenza antigen with various avian samples
AuthorsChua, TH1 9
Ellis, TM1
Wong, CW8
Guan, Y3 4
Sheng, XG3
Peng, G3
Lamichhane, C10
Maliadis, C5
Tan, SW6
Selleck, P7
Parkinson, J2
KeywordsAntigen test
ELISA
H5N1 avian influenza
Immunochromatographic test
Poultry
Waterfowl
Issue Date2007
PublisherAmerican Association of Avian Pathologists, Inc. The Journal's web site is located at http://avdi.allenpress.com/avdionline/?request=index-html
CitationAvian Diseases, 2007, v. 51 n. 1, p. 96-105 [How to Cite?]
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1637/0005-2086(2007)051[0096:PEOFDT]2.0.CO;2
AbstractIn this paper, we report on the evaluation of five influenza antigen detection tests by avian influenza H5N1 virus-positive swab samples to estimate their diagnostic sensitivity. The tests included two chromatographic immunoassays, an H5 avian influenza-specific antigen detection enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), an influenza Aantigen detection ELISA, and an H5 rapid immunoblot assay. The results showed that the overall sensitivities of these tests ranged from 36.3% to 51.4% (95% confidence interval ranging from 31.0% to 57.0%), which were comparable to Directigen™ Flu A antigen detection tests but substantially lower than genome detection methods. Diagnostic sensitivity performance is a function of the concentration of antigens in samples and the analytical sensitivity of the individual test. The test sensitivities were significantly higher for sick and dead birds by cloacal, tracheal, or tissue swabs than for fecal swabs from apparently healthy birds, and these tests would not be suitable for surveillance testing of clinically healthy birds. Furthermore, the sensitivity for testing tracheal and cloacal swabs from waterfowl and wild birds was not as good as for chickens. This was most likely to be associated with variation in virus titers between specimens from different bird species. However, the tests showed good sensitivities for testing brain swabs from clinically affected waterfowl species. The results indicate that these antigen detection tests could be used for preliminary investigations of H5N1 outbreaks as a low-cost, simple flock test in sick and dead birds for the rapid detection of H5N1 infection. However, the relatively low sensitivity of the tests as individual bird tests means that they should be used on optimal clinical specimens from diseased birds, testing birds on a flock basis, or testing samples as close to the onset of disease as possible before viral titers diminish. They should be followed up by confirmatory tests, such as reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction or viral culture, wherever possible but could assist in facilitating rapid investigations and control interventions.
ISSN0005-2086
2011 Impact Factor: 1.462
2011 SCImago Journal Rankings: 0.098
DOIhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1637/0005-2086(2007)051[0096:PEOFDT]2.0.CO;2
ISI Accession Number IDWOS:000245372100015
ReferencesReferences in Scopus
DC Field
Value
dc.contributor.authorChua, TH
dc.contributor.authorEllis, TM
dc.contributor.authorWong, CW
dc.contributor.authorGuan, Y
dc.contributor.authorSheng, XG
dc.contributor.authorPeng, G
dc.contributor.authorLamichhane, C
dc.contributor.authorMaliadis, C
dc.contributor.authorTan, SW
dc.contributor.authorSelleck, P
dc.contributor.authorParkinson, J
dc.date.accessioned2010-09-06T07:49:14Z
dc.date.available2010-09-06T07:49:14Z
dc.date.issued2007
dc.description.abstractIn this paper, we report on the evaluation of five influenza antigen detection tests by avian influenza H5N1 virus-positive swab samples to estimate their diagnostic sensitivity. The tests included two chromatographic immunoassays, an H5 avian influenza-specific antigen detection enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), an influenza Aantigen detection ELISA, and an H5 rapid immunoblot assay. The results showed that the overall sensitivities of these tests ranged from 36.3% to 51.4% (95% confidence interval ranging from 31.0% to 57.0%), which were comparable to Directigen™ Flu A antigen detection tests but substantially lower than genome detection methods. Diagnostic sensitivity performance is a function of the concentration of antigens in samples and the analytical sensitivity of the individual test. The test sensitivities were significantly higher for sick and dead birds by cloacal, tracheal, or tissue swabs than for fecal swabs from apparently healthy birds, and these tests would not be suitable for surveillance testing of clinically healthy birds. Furthermore, the sensitivity for testing tracheal and cloacal swabs from waterfowl and wild birds was not as good as for chickens. This was most likely to be associated with variation in virus titers between specimens from different bird species. However, the tests showed good sensitivities for testing brain swabs from clinically affected waterfowl species. The results indicate that these antigen detection tests could be used for preliminary investigations of H5N1 outbreaks as a low-cost, simple flock test in sick and dead birds for the rapid detection of H5N1 infection. However, the relatively low sensitivity of the tests as individual bird tests means that they should be used on optimal clinical specimens from diseased birds, testing birds on a flock basis, or testing samples as close to the onset of disease as possible before viral titers diminish. They should be followed up by confirmatory tests, such as reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction or viral culture, wherever possible but could assist in facilitating rapid investigations and control interventions.
dc.description.natureLink_to_subscribed_fulltext
dc.identifier.citationAvian Diseases, 2007, v. 51 n. 1, p. 96-105 [How to Cite?]
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1637/0005-2086(2007)051[0096:PEOFDT]2.0.CO;2
dc.identifier.doihttp://dx.doi.org/10.1637/0005-2086(2007)051[0096:PEOFDT]2.0.CO;2
dc.identifier.epage105
dc.identifier.hkuros138142
dc.identifier.isiWOS:000245372100015
dc.identifier.issn0005-2086
2011 Impact Factor: 1.462
2011 SCImago Journal Rankings: 0.098
dc.identifier.issue1
dc.identifier.openurl
dc.identifier.pmid17461273
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-33947602466
dc.identifier.spage96
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/78988
dc.identifier.volume51
dc.languageeng
dc.publisherAmerican Association of Avian Pathologists, Inc. The Journal's web site is located at http://avdi.allenpress.com/avdionline/?request=index-html
dc.publisher.placeUnited States
dc.relation.ispartofAvian Diseases
dc.relation.referencesReferences in Scopus
dc.subjectAntigen test
dc.subjectELISA
dc.subjectH5N1 avian influenza
dc.subjectImmunochromatographic test
dc.subjectPoultry
dc.subjectWaterfowl
dc.titlePerformance evaluation of five detection tests for avian influenza antigen with various avian samples
dc.typeArticle
Author Affiliations
  1. Murdoch University
  2. Department of Agriculture and Food Western Australia
  3. Xiamen University
  4. The University of Hong Kong
  5. Bio-Mediq DPC Pty. Ltd.
  6. Rockeby Biomed (Singapore) Pte. Ltd.
  7. CSIRO Australian Animal Health Laboratory
  8. Tai Lung Veterinary Laboratory
  9. Agri-Food and Veterinary Authority
  10. Synbiotics Corporation