Evaluation of a New Antibody-Based Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay for the Detection of Bovine Leukemia Virus Infection in Dairy Cattle

The objective of this study was to validate a new blocking enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) (designated M108 for milk and S108 for serum samples) for detecting bovine leukemia virus (BLV) infection in dairy cattle. Milk, serum, and ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid–blood samples were collected from 524 adult Holstein cows originating from 6 dairy herds in Central Argentina. The M108 and S108 were compared with agar gel immunodiffusion (AGID), polymerase chain reaction and a commercial ELISA. Because there is currently no reference test capable of serving as a gold standard, the test sensitivity (SE) and specificity (SP) were evaluated by the use of a latent class model. Statistical inference was performed by classical maximum likelihood and by Bayesian techniques. The maximum-likelihood analysis was performed assuming conditional independence of tests, whereas the Bayesian approach allowed for conditional dependence. No clear conclusion could be drawn about conditional dependence of tests. Results with maximum likelihood (under conditional independence) and posterior Bayes (under conditional dependence) were practically the same. Conservative estimates of SE and SP (with 95% confidence intervals) for M108 were 98.6 (96.7; 99.6) and 96.7 (92.9; 98.8) and for S108 99.5 (98.2; 99.9) and 95.4 (90.9; 98.1), respectively. The ELISA 108 using either milk or serum to detect BLV-infected animals had comparable SE and SP with the official AGID and a commercial ELISA test, which are currently the most widely accepted tests for the serological diagnosis of BLV infection. Therefore, ELISA 108 can be used as an alternative test in monitoring and control programs.

[1]  B. Klingeborn,et al.  Evaluation of an indirect ELISA for the detection of antibodies to bovine leukaemia virus in milk and serum. , 1991, Journal of virological methods.

[2]  M. Ackermann,et al.  [Comparison of two ELISA systems for the detection of antibodies against IBR/IPV and against enzootic bovine leukemia virus]. , 1994, Schweizer Archiv fur Tierheilkunde.

[3]  L. Joseph,et al.  Bayesian Approaches to Modeling the Conditional Dependence Between Multiple Diagnostic Tests , 2001, Biometrics.

[4]  Wesley O. Johnson,et al.  Correlation‐adjusted estimation of sensitivity and specificity of two diagnostic tests , 2003 .

[5]  S D Walter,et al.  Estimation of test error rates, disease prevalence and relative risk from misclassified data: a review. , 1988, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[6]  M. Murtaugh,et al.  Detection of bovine leukemia virus in cattle by the polymerase chain reaction. , 1991, Journal of virological methods.

[7]  Ian A Gardner,et al.  "TAGS", a program for the evaluation of test accuracy in the absence of a gold standard. , 2002, Preventive veterinary medicine.

[8]  G. Marsolais,et al.  Importance of Primer Selection in the Application of PCR Technology to the Diagnosis of Bovine Leukemia Virus , 1994, Journal of veterinary diagnostic investigation : official publication of the American Association of Veterinary Laboratory Diagnosticians, Inc.

[9]  M. Greinera,et al.  Epidemiologic issues in the validation of veterinary diagnostic tests , 2000 .

[10]  Claes Enùea,et al.  Estimation of sensitivity and specificity of diagnostic tests and disease prevalence when the true disease state is unknown , 2000 .

[11]  G. Buehring,et al.  Evidence for bovine leukemia virus in mammary epithelial cells of infected cows. , 1994, Laboratory investigation; a journal of technical methods and pathology.

[12]  J. Molloy,et al.  A field evaluation of the polymerase chain reaction procedure for the detection of bovine leukaemia virus proviral DNA in cattle. , 1994, Veterinary microbiology.

[13]  P A Lachenbruch,et al.  Effects of misclassifications on statistical inferences in epidemiology. , 1980, American journal of epidemiology.

[14]  D. Beier,et al.  Genetic diversity and spread of Bovine leukaemia virus isolates in Argentine dairy cattle , 2005, Archives of Virology.

[15]  J. R. Landis,et al.  The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. , 1977, Biometrics.

[16]  S. Belák,et al.  Bovine leukaemia virus: rapid detection of proviral DNA by nested PCR in blood and organs of experimentally infected calves. , 1994, Veterinary microbiology.

[17]  H. Fechner,et al.  Evaluation of polymerase chain reaction (PCR) application in diagnosis of bovine leukaemia virus (BLV) infection in naturally infected cattle. , 1996, Zentralblatt fur Veterinarmedizin. Reihe B. Journal of veterinary medicine. Series B.

[18]  P M Vacek,et al.  The effect of conditional dependence on the evaluation of diagnostic tests. , 1985, Biometrics.

[19]  T. Yasunaga,et al.  Complete nucleotide sequence of the genome of bovine leukemia virus: its evolutionary relationship to other retroviruses. , 1985, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[20]  J. Miller,et al.  Use of glycoprotein antigen in the immunodiffusion test for bovine leukemia virus antibodies. , 1977, European journal of cancer.

[21]  J. Miller,et al.  Comparison of the commercial agar-gel immunodiffusion test and radioimmunoprecipitation assay for detection of antibodies to bovine leukemia virus. , 1985, American journal of veterinary research.

[22]  J. Rovnak,et al.  The correlation between the direct and indirect detection of bovine leukemia virus infection in cattle. , 1988, Leukemia research.

[23]  G. Dolcini,et al.  Development and evaluation of a highly sensitive and specific blocking enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay and polymerase chain reaction assay for diagnosis of bovine leukemia virus infection in cattle. , 2001, American journal of veterinary research.

[24]  H. Lewin,et al.  The prevalence of proviral bovine leukemia virus in peripheral blood mononuclear cells at two subclinical stages of infection , 1996, Journal of virology.

[25]  Yinsheng Qu,et al.  A Model for Evaluating Sensitivity and Specificity for Correlated Diagnostic Tests in Efficacy Studies with an Imperfect Reference Test , 1998 .

[26]  P. Wright,et al.  Standardisation and validation of enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay techniques for the detection of antibody in infectious disease diagnosis. , 1993, Revue scientifique et technique.

[27]  M. Nielen,et al.  Detection of extracellular factor-positive Streptococcus suis serotype 2 strains in tonsillar swabs of live sows by PCR. , 2005, Veterinary microbiology.

[28]  Hassan Mohammad Naif,et al.  Early detection of bovine leukemia virus by using an enzyme-linked assay for polymerase chain reaction-amplified proviral DNA in experimentally infected cattle , 1992, Journal of clinical microbiology.

[29]  A. Burny,et al.  The diagnosis of enzootic bovine leukosis. , 1985, Comparative immunology, microbiology and infectious diseases.

[30]  S. Walter,et al.  Estimating the error rates of diagnostic tests. , 1980, Biometrics.

[31]  Hassan Mohammad Naif,et al.  Bovine leukaemia proviral DNA detection in cattle using the polymerase chain reaction. , 1990, Veterinary microbiology.

[32]  H Stryhn,et al.  Conditional dependence between tests affects the diagnosis and surveillance of animal diseases. , 2000, Preventive veterinary medicine.

[33]  H. Lewin,et al.  Detection of bovine leukemia virus proviral DNA in individual cells. , 1993, PCR methods and applications.

[34]  J A Swets,et al.  Measuring the accuracy of diagnostic systems. , 1988, Science.

[35]  R. Stephens,et al.  The nucleotide sequence of the env gene and post-env region of bovine leukemia virus. , 1984, Virology.

[36]  H. Fechner,et al.  [Possibilities and limitations for use of the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) in the diagnosis of bovine leukemia virus (BLV) infection in cattle]. , 1998, DTW. Deutsche tierarztliche Wochenschrift.