BackgroundBovine tuberculosis (bTB) diagnosis is impaired by numerous factors including cross-reactivity with Mycobacterium avium subspecies paratuberculosis, which causes Johne’s disease (JD). In addition, the effect of repeated bTB-intradermal testing on the performance of JD diagnostic tests is not fully understood. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of repeated bTB-intradermal tests under field conditions in Spain on the JD serological status of cattle.MethodsbTB-positive herds (n=264) from Castilla-y-Leon region were selected and matched with officially tuberculosis-free control herds. The association between JD and bTB status at the herd level was assessed using conditional logistic regression and, in herds with both JD-positive and bTB-positive animals, a Bayesian hierarchical mixed-effect model was used for individual-level analysis.ResultsA significantly higher risk of being JD positive (OR: 1.48; 95 per cent CI: 1.01 to 2.15) was found for bTB-positive herds compared with controls. Individual results indicated that cattle tested more than three times per year, within the last 90 days and more than 12 months were more likely to be JD positive. A skin test-related boost in antibody response could be the cause of an apparent increase of the sensitivity of the JD-absorbed ELISA.ConclusionThe results demonstrate the interaction between bTB repeated testing and JD individual and herd-level results and this improved knowledge will facilitate the design of more effective control programmes in herds coinfected with two of the most important endemic diseases affecting cattle in Spain.
In Spain, the national bovine tuberculosis (bTB) eradication program is based on yearly skin testing of every ≥6 weeks old animal using the single or comparative tuberculin test and parallel use of the interferon-gamma (IFN-γ) assay as an ancillary diagnostic test in infected herds. There are several versions of the latter. Recently, a new commercial IDvet IFN-γ assay has been authorized for use in the program, but there is limited scientific evidence about its performance in different epidemiological settings. Therefore, two studies to evaluate the performance of the IDvet assay were conducted. In study 1, a concordance analysis between the new IDvet and the Bovigam IFN-γ assay in use in Spain for over 10 years was conducted. In study 2, results from the IDvet assay when applied in tandem with a single intradermal tuberculin (SIT) test were used to evaluate the concordance between both tests and to estimate their sensitivity (Se) and specificity (Sp) using a Bayesian latent-class model. Field data from cattle herds located in Madrid and Castilla y Leon (Spain) were collected. For study 1, herd selection was based on a high expected prevalence of reactors to the IFN-γ assay, while herds were selected at random to estimate Se and Sp of the new IDvet assay in study 2. Agreement between the results obtained with both kits for IFN-γ assay was poor (Kappa = 0.20), and a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis indicated a low Se of the new IDvet relative to the Bovigam in a heavily bTB infected population. The Bayesian latent-class analysis estimated the Se of the IDvet assay to be 36.7% [95% probability posterior interval (PPI) 14.7–78.8%] with estimated Sp close to 100% when the cut-off recommended by the manufacturer (35) was applied. At the alternative cut-off values of 16 and 4, the estimated Se of the IDvet assay increased to 49.0% (PPI: 24.8–94.1%) and 56.0% (PPI: 30.8–96.3%), respectively, while maintaining a high specificity. The results suggest that the new IDvet assay may have lower sensitivity than the Bovigam for diagnosis of bTB in cattle herds in Spain, and that adjusting its cut-off might be considered.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.