ArticleVeterinary sciences2025
High-Accuracy Serodiagnosis of African Swine Fever Using P72 and P30-Based Lateral Flow Assays: A Validation Study with Field Samples in Thailand.
Article in Veterinary sciences, 2025. 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.
- Molecular Detection of Feline HemotropicVeterinary sciences · 2026Article
- Development and Evaluation of Three Indirect ELISA Methods Based on Novel Recombinant ASFV Antigens for Serological Detection of African Swine Fever.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
African Swine Fever (ASF) control is severely hampered by the reliance on slow, laboratory-bound diagnostics. While rapid, field-deployable lateral flow assays (LFAs) are urgently needed, the comparative performance of key single-antigen targets remains poorly characterized. This study aimed to develop and systematically evaluate the diagnostic performance of three in-house single-antigen LFAs targeting ASF virus P30, P54, and P72, using swine field samples from Thailand, including a panel of 143 quantitative polymerase chain reaction-negative swine serum samples. The performance of each LFA was compared against a commercial multi-antigen (P32/P62/P72) indirect ELISA, which served as the reference standard, classifying 64 samples as positive and 79 as negative. The P72-based LFA demonstrated perfect diagnostic performance (100% sensitivity, 100% specificity) and perfect agreement (κ = 1.0) with the enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). Similarly, the P30 LFA demonstrated high performance (100% sensitivity, 98.7% specificity) with 'Almost Perfect' agreement (κ = 0.9859). In contrast, the P54 LFA was unsuitable, achieving 100% sensitivity but unacceptably low specificity (88.6%) due to a high rate of false positives. Overall, the single-antigen P72 and P30 LFAs demonstrated excellent concordance with the multi-antigen ELISA, supporting their reliable for detecting antibodies against ASFV. Although these assays do not replace molecular methods for acute infection detection, they represent valuable complementary tools for serosurveillance.
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.