Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35238485›Full record

ArticleZoonoses and public health2022

Prevalence of anti-severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 antibodies in cats in Germany and other European countries in the early phase of the coronavirus disease-19 pandemic.

Julia Maria Adler, Corinna Weber, Kerstin Wernike, Anna Michelitsch, Karin Friedrich, Jakob Trimpert, Martin Beer, Barbara Kohn, Klaus Osterrieder, Elisabeth Müller

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Zoonoses and public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 14% 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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Julia Maria AdlerInstitut für Virologie, Freie Universität Berlin, Berlin, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-8147-0351
Corinna WeberLaboklin GmbH & Co.KG, Bad Kissingen, Germany.
Kerstin WernikeInstitute of Diagnostic Virology, Friedrich-Loeffler-Institut, Greifswald-Insel Riems, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-8071-0827
Anna MichelitschInstitute of Diagnostic Virology, Friedrich-Loeffler-Institut, Greifswald-Insel Riems, Germany.
Karin FriedrichLaboklin GmbH & Co.KG, Bad Kissingen, Germany.
Jakob TrimpertInstitut für Virologie, Freie Universität Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Martin BeerInstitute of Diagnostic Virology, Friedrich-Loeffler-Institut, Greifswald-Insel Riems, Germany.
Barbara KohnKlinik für kleine Haustiere, Freie Universität Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Klaus OsterriederInstitut für Virologie, Freie Universität Berlin, Berlin, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-5313-2176
Elisabeth MüllerLaboklin GmbH & Co.KG, Bad Kissingen, Germany.
Laboklin (Germany) · DEFriedrich-Loeffler-Institut · DEFreie Universität Berlin · DECity University of Hong Kong · HK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

During the first months of the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), cases of human-to-cat transmission were reported. Seroconversion was shown in cats infected under experimental and natural conditions. This large-scale survey of 1,005 serum samples was conducted to investigate anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody prevalence in domestic cats during the first 7 months of the pandemic in Germany and other European countries. In addition, we compared the sensitivity and specificity of two multispecies SARS-CoV-2 antibody enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISA). Results were confirmed by using an indirect immunofluorescence test (iIFT) and a surrogate virus neutralization test (sVNT). Sera that were highly positive for feline coronavirus (FCoV) antibodies (n = 103) were included to correct for cross-reactivity of the tests used. Our results showed an overall SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity of 1.9% (n = 19) in a receptor-binding domain (RBD)-based ELISA, additional 0.8% (n = 8) were giving inconclusive results. In contrast, a nucleocapsid-based ELISA revealed 0.5% (n = 5) positive and 0.2% (n = 2) inconclusive results. While the iIFT and sVNT confirmed 100% of positive and 50%-57.1% of the doubtful results as determined in the RBD ELISA, the nucleocapsid-based assay showed a high discrepancy and only one of the five positive results could be confirmed. The results indicate significant deficits of the nucleocapsid-based ELISA with respect to sensitivity and specificity. Due to a significantly higher rate (5.8%) of positive results in the group of highly FCoV antibody-positive samples, cross-reactivity of the FCoV-ELISA with SARS-CoV-2 antibodies cannot be excluded. Furthermore, we investigated the impact of direct contact of domestic cats (n = 23) to SARS-CoV-2 positive owners. Considering one inconclusive result, which got confirmed by iIFT, this exposure did not lead to a significantly higher prevalence (4.4%; p = .358) among tested subjects. Overall, we conclude that cats are a negligible entity with respect to virus transmission in Europe.

Indexed as

Cat DiseasesCOVID-19AnimalsAntibodies, ViralCatsEnzyme-Linked Immunosorbent AssayHumansPandemicsPrevalenceSARS-CoV-2Antibodies, ViralcatsCOVID-19SARS-CoV-2seroprevalence

Identifiers

PMID35238485
PMCPMC9115359
OpenAlexW4214876013

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.