Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29925781›Full record

ArticleVeterinary sciences2018

Additional Progress in the Development and Application of a Direct, Rapid Immunohistochemical Test for Rabies Diagnosis.

Charles E Rupprecht, Zhiquan Xiang, Alexandre Servat, Richard Franka, Jordona Kirby, Hildegund C J Ertl

Erratum issuedOpen access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Veterinary sciences, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 19% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Charles E RupprechtLYSSA LLC, Atlanta, GA 30333, USA. charleserupprechtii@gmail.com.
Zhiquan XiangThe Wistar Institute, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA. jxiang@wistar.org.
Alexandre ServatOIE/WHO/EU Laboratory for Rabies and Wildlife, French Agency for Food, Environmental and Occupational Health and Safety, 54220 Malzeville, France. Alexandre.SERVAT@anses.fr.
Richard FrankaCDC, Atlanta, GA 30333, USA. rpf5@cdc.gov.
Jordona KirbyUSDA, APHIS, Wildlife Services, Milton, FL 32583, USA. jordona.d.kirby@aphis.usda.gov.
Hildegund C J ErtlThe Wistar Institute, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA. ertl@wistar.org.ORCID 0000-0001-9795-5206
The Wistar Institute · USAgence Nationale de Sécurité Sanitaire de l’Alimentation, de l’Environnement et du Travail · FRAnimal and Plant Health Inspection Service · USCDC Foundation · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Laboratory-based surveillance is fundamental to effective rabies prevention and control. The direct fluorescent antibody (AB) test (FAT) is the gold standard for rabies diagnosis. Recently, additional tests besides the FAT have been developed, such as the direct rapid immunohistochemical test (DRIT). In this study, our objective was to further refine technical aspects of the DRIT using a combination of two monoclonal ABs (MABs), 502 and 802, conduct additional testing among rabies reference laboratories using a diversity of animal species and rabies virus (RV) variants and compare the potential utility of the DRIT for end users via proficiency testing (PT) against the FAT. Considering the ideal molar ratios of biotin to AB in formulation of the DRIT conjugate, 3.9 was found to be superior to 7.4, for detection of RV antigens in the brain of a naturally infected raccoon. Optimization of the DRIT conjugate may also be dependent upon the apparent choice of specific viral antigens for testing, as a gray fox RV variant reacted less strongly than a raccoon RV variant in determining the working dilution of the MAB cocktail. Using the same MABs and protocol, the DRIT was compared to the FAT using more than 800 samples of mammalian brains, representative of more than 25 taxa, including in excess of 250 animal rabies cases from Europe and North America. Sensitivity was determined at 98% (96⁻100%, 95% CI) and specificity was calculated at 95% (92⁻96%, 95% CI). In a comparison among end users, PT of laboratory personnel resulted in values of 77⁻100% sensitivity and 86-100% specificity. Based upon these and previously reported results, the DRIT appears to be a suitable alternative to the FAT for use in lyssavirus diagnosis.

Indexed as

diagnosisdirect rapid immunohistochemical testfluorescent antibody testlyssavirusproficiency testingrabiessensitivityspecificitysurveillancezoonosis

Identifiers

PMID29925781
PMCPMC6024515
OpenAlexW2809112168

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.