Cargando…

Performance of 4 Point‐of‐Care Screening Tests for Feline Leukemia Virus and Feline Immunodeficiency Virus

BACKGROUND: More than 3 million cats in the United States are infected with FeLV or FIV. The cornerstone of control is identification and segregation of infected cats. HYPOTHESIS/OBJECTIVES: To compare test performance with well‐characterized clinical samples of currently available FeLV antigen/FIV...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Levy, J.K., Crawford, P. Cynda, Tucker, S.J.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5354053/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28158913
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jvim.14648
_version_ 1782515257497878528
author Levy, J.K.
Crawford, P. Cynda
Tucker, S.J.
author_facet Levy, J.K.
Crawford, P. Cynda
Tucker, S.J.
author_sort Levy, J.K.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: More than 3 million cats in the United States are infected with FeLV or FIV. The cornerstone of control is identification and segregation of infected cats. HYPOTHESIS/OBJECTIVES: To compare test performance with well‐characterized clinical samples of currently available FeLV antigen/FIV antibody combination test kits. ANIMALS: Surplus serum and plasma from diagnostic samples submitted by animal shelters, diagnostic laboratories, veterinary clinics, and cat research colonies. None of the cats had been vaccinated against FIV. The final sample set included 146 FeLV+, 154 FeLV−, 94 FIV+, and 97 FIV− samples. METHODS: Prospective, blind comparison to a gold standard: Samples were evaluated in 4 different point‐of‐care tests by ELISA antigen plate tests (FeLV) and virus isolation (FIV) as the reference standards. All test results were visually read by 2 blinded observers. RESULTS: Sensitivity and specificity, respectively, for FeLV were SNAP (®) (100%/100%), WITNESS (®) (89.0%/95.5%), Anigen(®) (91.8%/95.5%), and VetScan(®) (85.6%/85.7%). Sensitivity and specificity for FIV were SNAP (®) (97.9%/99.0%), WITNESS (®) (94.7%/100%), Anigen(®) (96.8%/99.0%), and VetScan(®) (91.5%/99.0%). CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPORTANCE: The SNAP (®) test had the best performance for FeLV, but there were no significant differences for FIV. In typical cat populations with seroprevalence of 1–5%, a majority of positive results reported by most point‐of‐care test devices would be false‐positives. This could result in unnecessary segregation or even euthanasia.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5354053
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-53540532017-03-22 Performance of 4 Point‐of‐Care Screening Tests for Feline Leukemia Virus and Feline Immunodeficiency Virus Levy, J.K. Crawford, P. Cynda Tucker, S.J. J Vet Intern Med SMALL ANIMAL BACKGROUND: More than 3 million cats in the United States are infected with FeLV or FIV. The cornerstone of control is identification and segregation of infected cats. HYPOTHESIS/OBJECTIVES: To compare test performance with well‐characterized clinical samples of currently available FeLV antigen/FIV antibody combination test kits. ANIMALS: Surplus serum and plasma from diagnostic samples submitted by animal shelters, diagnostic laboratories, veterinary clinics, and cat research colonies. None of the cats had been vaccinated against FIV. The final sample set included 146 FeLV+, 154 FeLV−, 94 FIV+, and 97 FIV− samples. METHODS: Prospective, blind comparison to a gold standard: Samples were evaluated in 4 different point‐of‐care tests by ELISA antigen plate tests (FeLV) and virus isolation (FIV) as the reference standards. All test results were visually read by 2 blinded observers. RESULTS: Sensitivity and specificity, respectively, for FeLV were SNAP (®) (100%/100%), WITNESS (®) (89.0%/95.5%), Anigen(®) (91.8%/95.5%), and VetScan(®) (85.6%/85.7%). Sensitivity and specificity for FIV were SNAP (®) (97.9%/99.0%), WITNESS (®) (94.7%/100%), Anigen(®) (96.8%/99.0%), and VetScan(®) (91.5%/99.0%). CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPORTANCE: The SNAP (®) test had the best performance for FeLV, but there were no significant differences for FIV. In typical cat populations with seroprevalence of 1–5%, a majority of positive results reported by most point‐of‐care test devices would be false‐positives. This could result in unnecessary segregation or even euthanasia. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2017-02-03 2017 /pmc/articles/PMC5354053/ /pubmed/28158913 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jvim.14648 Text en Copyright © 2017 The Authors. Journal of Veterinary Internal Medicine published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of the American College of Veterinary Internal Medicine. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution‐NonCommercial (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not used for commercial purposes.
spellingShingle SMALL ANIMAL
Levy, J.K.
Crawford, P. Cynda
Tucker, S.J.
Performance of 4 Point‐of‐Care Screening Tests for Feline Leukemia Virus and Feline Immunodeficiency Virus
title Performance of 4 Point‐of‐Care Screening Tests for Feline Leukemia Virus and Feline Immunodeficiency Virus
title_full Performance of 4 Point‐of‐Care Screening Tests for Feline Leukemia Virus and Feline Immunodeficiency Virus
title_fullStr Performance of 4 Point‐of‐Care Screening Tests for Feline Leukemia Virus and Feline Immunodeficiency Virus
title_full_unstemmed Performance of 4 Point‐of‐Care Screening Tests for Feline Leukemia Virus and Feline Immunodeficiency Virus
title_short Performance of 4 Point‐of‐Care Screening Tests for Feline Leukemia Virus and Feline Immunodeficiency Virus
title_sort performance of 4 point‐of‐care screening tests for feline leukemia virus and feline immunodeficiency virus
topic SMALL ANIMAL
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5354053/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28158913
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jvim.14648
work_keys_str_mv AT levyjk performanceof4pointofcarescreeningtestsforfelineleukemiavirusandfelineimmunodeficiencyvirus
AT crawfordpcynda performanceof4pointofcarescreeningtestsforfelineleukemiavirusandfelineimmunodeficiencyvirus
AT tuckersj performanceof4pointofcarescreeningtestsforfelineleukemiavirusandfelineimmunodeficiencyvirus