OIE Collaborating Centre for Diseases at the Animal-human Interface, Istituto Zooprofilattico Sperimentale delle Venezie, Viale dell'Università 10, 35020 Legnaro, Italy.
Vaccine. 2012 Aug 17;30(38):5611-5. doi: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2012.06.089. Epub 2012 Jul 10.
The assessment of fox immunity following oral rabies vaccination (ORV) is commonly applied to assess the efficacy of an ORV campaign in the field. Several ELISA kits have been developed and validated for their use for rabies serology in wildlife as an alternative to neutralizing techniques (NT), such as the fluorescent antibody virus neutralization test (FAVN) and the rapid fluorescent foci inhibition test (RFFIT). At a European level, NT and ELISA tests are used interchangeably and on different types of samples collected for vaccination follow-up. This has resulted in a difficulty in comparing the results generated with different diagnostic tools. We have evaluated (a) the effect of two different matrices commonly used for serology in red foxes on the results of the FAVN and (b) the performance of two commercially available ELISAs in comparison with the FAVN, as a gold standard, using a panel of over 700 field fox samples. Moderate agreement was observed when comparing results from different matrices. We found a very low level of agreement and low values of relative sensitivity and specificity of the ELISAs tested in comparison with the FAVN. Our findings confirm, using a vast collection of field samples obtained during post-vaccination surveillance campaigns in Italy, the need for improved reliability of certain serological tests.
评估口服狂犬病疫苗（ORV）接种后的狐狸免疫力，通常用于评估 ORV 野外疫苗接种活动的效果。已经开发并验证了几种 ELISA 试剂盒，用于替代中和技术（NT）进行野生动物狂犬病血清学检测，如荧光抗体病毒中和试验（FAVN）和快速荧光灶抑制试验（RFFIT）。在欧洲层面，NT 和 ELISA 检测可互换使用，并用于接种后监测收集的不同类型样本。这导致很难比较不同诊断工具产生的结果。我们评估了：(a) 两种常用于红狐血清学检测的不同基质对 FAVN 结果的影响；(b) 两种市售 ELISA 与 FAVN（金标准）的性能比较，使用了超过 700 个野外狐狸样本的面板。当比较不同基质的结果时，观察到了中度一致性。与 FAVN 相比，我们发现所测试的 ELISA 的一致性非常低，相对敏感性和特异性值也较低。我们的研究结果证实，使用在意大利接种后监测活动中获得的大量野外样本，某些血清学检测的可靠性需要提高。
