ArticleVeterinary research communications2008
Improving the specificity of immunodiagnosis for porcine brucellosis.
Article in Veterinary research communications, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Investigating the use of protein saver cards for storage and subsequent detection of bovine anti-Brucella abortus smooth lipopolysaccharide antibodies and gamma interferon.Clinical and vaccine immunology : CVI · 2013Article
- Raman spectroscopy as a potential tool for detection of Brucella spp. in milk.Applied and environmental microbiology · 2012Article
- In situ microscopy analysis reveals local innate immune response developed around Brucella infected cells in resistant and susceptible mice.PLoS pathogens · 2012Article
- False positive seroreactivity to brucellosis in tuberculosis patients: a prevalence study.International journal of general medicine · 2011Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This report describes the use of cell mediated immunity to improve specificity of current diagnosis for Brucella suis. Diagnosis is problematic due to cross reactions that lead to false positive serological reactions (FPSR) in the standard diagnostic tests. A common cause of this cross reactivity is infection with the organism Yersinia enterocolitica O:9. Gottingen mini-pigs were experimentally infected with B. suis biovar I field strain or Y. enterocolitica serotype O:9 biotype 3. Infection was followed for 70 days. During this time whole blood stimulation assays were set up using Brucella specific antigen. IFNgamma was measured in the supernatants (SN) from these assays by ELISA. Concurrent standard serological tests were carried out. The results indicate that the IFNgamma assay is specifically able to distinguish Y. enterocolitica O:9 infection from a B. suis infection in experimentally infected mini-pigs. These results represent an improvement in diagnostic specificity compared to currently used serological tests. Thus suggesting that in a surveillance setting this test could be applied as a confirmatory test in the face of FPSR.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.