4.6 Article

Performance Characteristics of Real-Time PCRs for African Swine Fever Virus Genome Detection-Comparison of Twelve Kits to an OIE-Recommended Method

Journal

VIRUSES-BASEL
Volume 14, Issue 2, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/v14020220

Keywords

African swine fever virus; laboratory diagnosis; commercial real-time PCR; performance; sensitivity; specificity

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study compared 12 commercial PCR kits and found that they were able to effectively detect ASFV genome in different matrices and genotypes. The overall specificity was 100%, and the sensitivity was between 95% and 100%. The choice of test system can be based on compatibility and internal control prioritization.
African swine fever (ASF) is a major threat to pig production, and real-time PCR (qPCR) protocols are an integral part of ASF laboratory diagnosis. With the pandemic spread of ASF, commercial kits have risen on the market. In Germany, the kits have to go through an approval process and thus, general validation can be assumed. However, they have never been compared to each other. In this study, 12 commercial PCR kits were compared to an OIE-recommended method. Samples representing different matrices, genome loads, and genotypes were included in a panel that was tested under diagnostic conditions. The comparison included user-friendliness, internal controls, and the time required. All qPCRs were able to detect ASFV genome in different matrices across all genotypes and disease courses. With one exception, there were no significant differences when comparing the overall mean. The overall specificity was 100% (95% CI 87.66-100), and the sensitivity was between 95% and 100% (95% CI 91.11-100). As can be expected, variability concerned samples with low genome load. To conclude, all tests were fit for purpose. The test system can therefore be chosen based on compatibility and prioritization of the internal control system.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available