ArticleJournal of veterinary internal medicine
Evaluation of an enzyme immunoassay and immunodiffusion for detection of anti-Histoplasma antibodies in serum from cats and dogs.
Article in Journal of veterinary internal medicine. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Histoplasmosis in domestic cats: new minimally invasive diagnostic techniques.Journal of feline medicine and surgery · 2024Article
- Evaluation of an enzyme immunoassay and immunodiffusion for detection of anti-Histoplasma antibodies in serum from cats and dogs.Journal of veterinary internal medicineArticle
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 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHistoplasma antigen and anti-Histoplasma antibody detection are used to support the diagnosis of histoplasmosis. There is a paucity of published data on antibody assays.
objectivesOur primary hypothesis was that anti-Histoplasma immunoglobulin G (IgG) antibody detection using enzyme immunoassay (EIA) will be more sensitive as compared to immunodiffusion (ID). ANIMALS: Thirty-seven cats and 22 dogs with proven or probable histoplasmosis; 157 negative control animals.
methodsResidual stored sera were tested for anti-Histoplasma antibodies using EIA and ID. Results of urine antigen EIA were reviewed retrospectively. Diagnostic sensitivity was calculated for all three assays and compared between immunoglobulin G (IgG) EIA and ID. The diagnostic sensitivity of urine antigen EIA and IgG EIA, interpreted in parallel, was reported.
resultsSensitivity of IgG EIA was 30/37 (81.1%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 68.5%-93.4%) in cats and 17/22 (77.3%; 95% CI, 59.8%-94.8%) in dogs. Diagnostic sensitivity of ID was 0/37 (0%; 95% CI, 0%-9.5%) in cats and 3/22 (13.6%; 95% CI, 0%-28.0%) in dogs. Immunoglobulin G EIA was positive in all animals (2 cats and 2 dogs) with histoplasmosis but without detectable antigen in urine. Diagnostic specificity of IgG EIA was 18/19 (94.7%; 95% CI, 74.0%-99.9%) in cats and 128/138 (92.8%; 95% CI, 87.1%-96.5%) in dogs. CONCLUSION AND CLINICAL IMPORTANCE: Antibody detection by EIA can be used to support the diagnosis of histoplasmosis in cats and dogs. Immunodiffusion has an unacceptably low diagnostic sensitivity and is not recommended.
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.