Cargando…
Evaluation of canine detection of COVID‐19 infected individuals under controlled settings
Reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT‐PCR) is currently the standard diagnostic method to detect symptomatic and asymptomatic individuals infected with Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2). However, RT‐PCR results are not immediate and may falsely be negative be...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9115492/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35316576 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/tbed.14529 |
_version_ | 1784709936902569984 |
---|---|
author | Chaber, Anne‐Lise Hazel, Susan Matthews, Brett Withers, Alexander Alvergnat, Guillaume Grandjean, Dominique Caraguel, Charles |
author_facet | Chaber, Anne‐Lise Hazel, Susan Matthews, Brett Withers, Alexander Alvergnat, Guillaume Grandjean, Dominique Caraguel, Charles |
author_sort | Chaber, Anne‐Lise |
collection | PubMed |
description | Reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT‐PCR) is currently the standard diagnostic method to detect symptomatic and asymptomatic individuals infected with Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2). However, RT‐PCR results are not immediate and may falsely be negative before an infected individual sheds viral particles in the upper airways where swabs are collected. Infected individuals emit volatile organic compounds in their breath and sweat that are detectable by trained dogs. Here, we evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of dog detection against SARS‐CoV‐2 infection. Fifteen dogs previously trained at two centres in Australia were presented to axillary sweat specimens collected from known SARS‐CoV‐2 human cases (n = 100) and non‐cases (n = 414). The true infection status of the cases and non‐cases were confirmed based on RT‐PCR results as well as clinical presentation. Across dogs, the overall diagnostic sensitivity (DSe) was 95.3% (95%CI: 93.1–97.6%) and diagnostic specificity (DSp) was 97.1% (95%CI: 90.7–100.0%). The DSp decreased significantly when non‐case specimens were collected over 1 min rather than 20 min (p value = .004). The location of evaluation did not impact the detection performances. The accuracy of detection varied across dogs and experienced dogs revealed a marginally better DSp (p value = .016). The potential and limitations of this alternative detection tool are discussed. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9115492 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-91154922022-05-18 Evaluation of canine detection of COVID‐19 infected individuals under controlled settings Chaber, Anne‐Lise Hazel, Susan Matthews, Brett Withers, Alexander Alvergnat, Guillaume Grandjean, Dominique Caraguel, Charles Transbound Emerg Dis Original Articles Reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT‐PCR) is currently the standard diagnostic method to detect symptomatic and asymptomatic individuals infected with Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2). However, RT‐PCR results are not immediate and may falsely be negative before an infected individual sheds viral particles in the upper airways where swabs are collected. Infected individuals emit volatile organic compounds in their breath and sweat that are detectable by trained dogs. Here, we evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of dog detection against SARS‐CoV‐2 infection. Fifteen dogs previously trained at two centres in Australia were presented to axillary sweat specimens collected from known SARS‐CoV‐2 human cases (n = 100) and non‐cases (n = 414). The true infection status of the cases and non‐cases were confirmed based on RT‐PCR results as well as clinical presentation. Across dogs, the overall diagnostic sensitivity (DSe) was 95.3% (95%CI: 93.1–97.6%) and diagnostic specificity (DSp) was 97.1% (95%CI: 90.7–100.0%). The DSp decreased significantly when non‐case specimens were collected over 1 min rather than 20 min (p value = .004). The location of evaluation did not impact the detection performances. The accuracy of detection varied across dogs and experienced dogs revealed a marginally better DSp (p value = .016). The potential and limitations of this alternative detection tool are discussed. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022-04-05 /pmc/articles/PMC9115492/ /pubmed/35316576 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/tbed.14529 Text en © 2022 The Authors. Transboundary and Emerging Diseases published by Wiley‐VCH GmbH https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Original Articles Chaber, Anne‐Lise Hazel, Susan Matthews, Brett Withers, Alexander Alvergnat, Guillaume Grandjean, Dominique Caraguel, Charles Evaluation of canine detection of COVID‐19 infected individuals under controlled settings |
title | Evaluation of canine detection of COVID‐19 infected individuals under controlled settings |
title_full | Evaluation of canine detection of COVID‐19 infected individuals under controlled settings |
title_fullStr | Evaluation of canine detection of COVID‐19 infected individuals under controlled settings |
title_full_unstemmed | Evaluation of canine detection of COVID‐19 infected individuals under controlled settings |
title_short | Evaluation of canine detection of COVID‐19 infected individuals under controlled settings |
title_sort | evaluation of canine detection of covid‐19 infected individuals under controlled settings |
topic | Original Articles |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9115492/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35316576 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/tbed.14529 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT chaberannelise evaluationofcaninedetectionofcovid19infectedindividualsundercontrolledsettings AT hazelsusan evaluationofcaninedetectionofcovid19infectedindividualsundercontrolledsettings AT matthewsbrett evaluationofcaninedetectionofcovid19infectedindividualsundercontrolledsettings AT withersalexander evaluationofcaninedetectionofcovid19infectedindividualsundercontrolledsettings AT alvergnatguillaume evaluationofcaninedetectionofcovid19infectedindividualsundercontrolledsettings AT grandjeandominique evaluationofcaninedetectionofcovid19infectedindividualsundercontrolledsettings AT caraguelcharles evaluationofcaninedetectionofcovid19infectedindividualsundercontrolledsettings |