Evaluation of the accuracy of the IDvet serological test for Mycoplasma bovis infection in cattle using latent class analysis of paired serum ELISA and quantitative real-time PCR on tonsillar swabs sampled at slaughter.

Publisher: Public Library of Science Country of Publication: United States NLM ID: 101285081 Publication Model: eCollection Cited Medium: Internet ISSN: 1932-6203 (Electronic) Linking ISSN: 19326203 NLM ISO Abbreviation: PLoS One Subsets: MEDLINE

Original Publication: San Francisco, CA : Public Library of Science

Mycoplasma bovis*/genetics ; Cattle Diseases*/diagnosis ; Mycoplasma Infections*/diagnosis ; Mycoplasma Infections*/veterinary; Cattle ; Animals ; Real-Time Polymerase Chain Reaction/veterinary ; Latent Class Analysis ; Bayes Theorem ; Sensitivity and Specificity ; Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay/veterinary ; Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay/methods ; Serologic Tests

Mycoplasma bovis (Mbovis) was first detected in cattle in New Zealand (NZ) in July 2017. To prevent further spread, NZ launched a world-first National Eradication Programme in May 2018. Existing diagnostic tests for Mbovis have been applied in countries where Mbovis is endemic, for detecting infection following outbreaks of clinical disease. Diagnostic test evaluation (DTE) under NZ conditions was thus required to inform the Programme. We used Bayesian Latent Class Analysis on paired serum ELISA (ID Screen Mycoplasma bovis Indirect from IDvet) and tonsillar swabs (qPCR) for DTE in the absence of a gold standard. Tested samples were collected at slaughter between June 2018 and November 2019, from infected herds depopulated by the Programme. A first set of models evaluated the detection of active infection, i.e. the presence of Mbovis in the host. At a modified serology positivity threshold of SP%> = 90, estimates of animal-level ELISA sensitivity was 72.8% (95% credible interval 68.5%-77.4%), respectively 97.7% (95% credible interval 97.3%-98.1%) for specificity, while the qPCR sensitivity was 45.2% (95% credible interval 41.0%-49.8%), respectively 99.6% (95% credible interval 99.4%-99.8%) for specificity. In a second set of models, prior information about ELISA specificity was obtained from the National Beef Cattle Surveillance Programme, a population theoretically free-or very low prevalence-of Mbovis. These analyses aimed to evaluate the accuracy of the ELISA test targeting prior exposure to Mbovis, rather than active infection. The specificity of the ELISA for detecting exposure to Mbovis was 99.9% (95% credible interval 99.7%-100.0%), hence near perfect at the threshold SP%=90. This specificity estimate, considerably higher than in the first set of models, was equivalent to the manufacturer's estimate. The corresponding ELISA sensitivity estimate was 66.0% (95% credible interval 62.7%-70.7%). These results confirm that the IDvet ELISA test is an appropriate tool for determining exposure and infection status of herds, both to delimit and confirm the absence of Mbovis.
Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
(Copyright: © 2023 Marquetoux et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.)

Prev Vet Med. 2011 Jul 1;100(3-4):155-62. (PMID: 21458086)
J Dairy Sci. 2018 Aug;101(8):7383-7396. (PMID: 29778474)
J Vet Intern Med. 2011 Jul-Aug;25(4):772-83. (PMID: 21745245)
Vet Microbiol. 2019 Apr;231:107-115. (PMID: 30955796)
Prev Vet Med. 2016 Apr 1;126:94-104. (PMID: 26883965)
Vet Rec. 2000 Mar 25;146(13):368-9. (PMID: 10803981)
J Dairy Sci. 2017 Oct;100(10):8296-8309. (PMID: 28780111)
Prev Vet Med. 2005 Sep 12;70(3-4):223-34. (PMID: 15894392)
Biometrics. 2004 Jun;60(2):427-35. (PMID: 15180668)
Prev Vet Med. 2016 Nov 1;134:113-121. (PMID: 27836032)
Prev Vet Med. 2010 Jan 1;93(1):66-70. (PMID: 19880206)
J Biopharm Stat. 2016;26(6):1078-1082. (PMID: 27548004)
Sci Rep. 2015 Jul 07;5:11861. (PMID: 26148538)
Biometrics. 1980 Mar;36(1):167-71. (PMID: 7370371)
Biometrics. 2010 Sep;66(3):855-63. (PMID: 19764953)
Prev Vet Med. 2017 Mar 1;138:37-47. (PMID: 28237234)
Prev Vet Med. 2011 Jan 1;98(1):74-8. (PMID: 21111499)
Prev Vet Med. 2005 Apr;68(1):19-33. (PMID: 15795013)
J Dairy Sci. 2018 Jan;101(1):584-589. (PMID: 29055548)
Vet J. 2016 Oct;216:142-7. (PMID: 27687942)
Vet Microbiol. 2013 Mar 23;162(2-4):949-953. (PMID: 23294861)
Am J Epidemiol. 2001 May 1;153(9):921-4. (PMID: 11323324)
BMC Vet Res. 2019 Oct 25;15(1):369. (PMID: 31653217)
J Vet Med B Infect Dis Vet Public Health. 2005 May;52(4):153-60. (PMID: 16000109)
N Z Vet J. 2020 Sep;68(5):309-312. (PMID: 32422083)
Vet Rec. 2005 Jun 11;156(24):767-71. (PMID: 15951499)
Transbound Emerg Dis. 2018 May;65 Suppl 1:91-109. (PMID: 29582590)

Date Created: 20230511 Date Completed: 20230515 Latest Revision: 20230615

20250114

PMC10174590

10.1371/journal.pone.0285598

37167206