Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-cphqk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-10T12:29:17.076Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Epidemiological evaluation of a monoclonal ELISA detecting antibodies against bovine leukaemia virus in serum pools

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 October 2009

K. Knapen ,
P. Kerkhofs ,
E. Thiry  and
M. Mammerickx
K. Knapen
Affiliation:
National Institute for Veterinary Research, 99 Groeselenberg, B-1180 Brussels, Belgium
P. Kerkhofs
Affiliation:
National Institute for Veterinary Research, 99 Groeselenberg, B-1180 Brussels, Belgium
E. Thiry
Affiliation:
Department of Virology, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Liège, Sart-Tilman, B-4000 Liége, Belgium
M. Mammerickx
Affiliation:
National Institute for Veterinary Research, 99 Groeselenberg, B-1180 Brussels, Belgium
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Sensitivity, specificity and predictive values of an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) for detecting antibodies against bovine leukaemia virus (BLV) were evaluated using a representative sample of 145 serum pools, comprising from 3 to 48 individual sera. The sample was constituted according to the frequency distribution of the negative and positive pools analysed during a screening involving the whole cattle population of Belgium. Sensitivity and specificity were estimated to 88·9% and 100% and the predicted negative and positive values were 99·9% and 100%, respectively. These results indicate the use of serum pools is suitable for the detection of BLV infected herds in eradication campaigns.

Type
Research Article
Information
Epidemiology & Infection , Volume 113 , Issue 3 , December 1994 , pp. 563 - 569
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1994

References

1.R, Kettmann, Portetelle, D, Mammerickx, M et al. Bovine leukemia virus: an exogenous RNA oncogenic virus. Proc Nat Acad Sci USA 1976; 73: 1014–8.Google Scholar
2.Bex, F, Brack, C, Mammerickx, M et al. Humoral antibody response to bovine leukemia virus infection in cattle and sheep. Cancer Res 1979; 39: 1118–23.Google ScholarPubMed
3.Mammerickx, M, Portetelle, D, Burny, A, Leunen, J. Detection by immunodiffusion tests and radioimmunoassay of antibodies to bovine leukosis virus antigens in sera of experimentally infected sheep and cattle. Zbl Vet Med B 1980; 27: 291–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4.Knapen, K, Kerkhofs, P, Mammerickx, M. Eradication de la leucose bovine enzootique en Belgique: bilan du dépistage de masse réalisé sur l'ensemble du cheptel national en 1989, 1990 et 1991. Ann Méd Vét 1993; 137: 197–201.Google Scholar
5.Mammerickx, M, Strobbe, R. L'épizootiologie de la leucose bovine enzootique en fonction de la taille des troupeaux. Ann Méd Vét 1986; 130: 53–9.Google Scholar
6.Mammerickx, M, Portetelle, D, Nys, J, Burny, A. Rapid detection of bovine leukemia virus infection in a large cattle population with an ELISA performed on pooled sera grouped by herd. Zbl Vet Med B 1985; 32: 601–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7.Portetelle, D, Mammerickx, M, Burny, A. Use of two monoclonal antibodies in an ELISA test for the detection of antibodies to bovine leukemia virus envelope protein gp51. J Virol Meth 1989; 23: 211–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8.JJ, Letesson, Lostrie-Trussart, N, Depelchin, A. Production d'anticorps monoclonaux spécifiques d'isotypes d'immunoglobulines bovines. Ann Méd Vét 1985; 129: 131–41.Google Scholar
9.PM, Bernard, Lapointe, C. Mesures statistiques en épidémiologie. Presse de 1'université du Québee, 1991: 170–9.Google Scholar
10.Thrusfield, M. Serological epidemiology. In: Veterinary epidemiology. London: Butterworths, 1986: 182.Google Scholar
11.Jenicek, M, Cleroux, R. Epidémiologie, Principe, Techniques, Applications, Ste Hyacinthe. Québee: Edisem Inc, 1983: 31–4.Google Scholar
12.Thiry, E, PP, Pastoret. L'évaluation ties méthodes diagnostiques. Ann Méd Vét 1992; 136: 269–72.Google Scholar