Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38362609›Full record

ArticleJournal of veterinary diagnostic investigation : official publication of the American Association of Veterinary Laboratory Diagnosticians, Inc2024

Comparative evaluation of assay performance for SARS-CoV-2 detection in animal oral samples, lung homogenates, and phosphate-buffered saline using the TaqPath COVID-19 Combo kit.

Megan R Miller, Andriy Tkachenko, Jake Guag, Stacey Alexander, Brett T Webb, Brianna L S Stenger

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of veterinary diagnostic investigation : official publication of the American Association of Veterinary Laboratory Diagnosticians, Inc, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 44% 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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Megan R MillerCenter for Veterinary Medicine, U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Laurel, MD, USA.
Andriy TkachenkoCenter for Veterinary Medicine, U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Laurel, MD, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-0048-9243
Jake GuagCenter for Veterinary Medicine, U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Laurel, MD, USA.
Stacey AlexanderDepartment of Health and Human Services-Laboratory Services, North Dakota, Bismarck, ND, USA.
Brett T WebbVeterinary Diagnostic Laboratory, North Dakota Agricultural Experiment Station, North Dakota State University, Fargo, ND, USA.
Brianna L S StengerVeterinary Diagnostic Laboratory, North Dakota Agricultural Experiment Station, North Dakota State University, Fargo, ND, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-0305-734X
Center for Veterinary Medicine · USNorth Dakota Department of Health · USNorth Dakota State University · USUniversity of Wyoming · US

Funding

Increasing the diagnostic PCR and next-generation sequencing capacity for the diagnosis and variant detection of COVID-19 in animals at the North Dakota State University Veterinary Diagnostic LabU18FD007519 · FDA · NORTH DAKOTA STATE UNIVERSITY · PI STENGER, BRIANNA · 2021 to 2021
$60k
FDA HHS U18 FD007519
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A One Health approach has been key to monitoring the COVID-19 pandemic, as human and veterinary medical professionals jointly met the demands for an extraordinary testing effort for SARS-CoV-2. Veterinary diagnostic laboratories continue to monitor SARS-CoV-2 infection in animals, furthering the understanding of zoonotic transmission dynamics between humans and animals. A RT-PCR assay is a primary animal screening tool established within validation and verification guidelines provided by the American Association of Veterinary Laboratory Diagnosticians (AAVLD), World Organisation for Animal Health (WOAH), and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). However, differences in sample matrices, RNA extraction methods, instrument platforms, gene targets, and cutoff values may affect test outcomes. Therefore, targeted validation for a new sample matrix used in any PCR assay is critical. We evaluated a COVID-19 assay for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 in feline and canine lung homogenates and oral swab samples. We used the commercial Applied Biosystems MagMAX Viral/Pathogen II (MVP II) nucleic acid isolation kit and TaqPath COVID-19 Combo kit, which are validated for a variety of human samples, including nasopharyngeal and oropharyngeal swab samples. Our masked test showed a high detection rate and no false-positive or false-negative results, supporting sample extension to include feline oral swab samples. Our study is a prime example of One Health, illustrating how a COVID-19 assay designed for human testing can be adapted and used to detect SARS-CoV-2 in oral swab samples from cats and likely dogs, but not lung homogenates.

Indexed as

Cat DiseasesCOVID-19Dog DiseasesAnimalsCatsClinical Laboratory TechniquesCOVID-19 TestingDogsHumansLungPandemicsPhosphatesRNA, ViralSARS-CoV-2Sensitivity and SpecificityPhosphatesRNA, Viralmatrix effectmethod evaluationOne HealthRT-PCRSARS-CoV-2

Identifiers

PMID38362609
PMCPMC10929630
OpenAlexW4391882149

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.