Browse > Article

Evaluation of Diagnostic Performance of a Polymerase Chain Reaction for Detection of Canine Dirofilaria immitis  

Pak, Son-Il (School of Veterinary Medicine and Institute of Veterinary Science, Kangwon National University)
Kim, Doo (School of Veterinary Medicine and Institute of Veterinary Science, Kangwon National University)
Publication Information
Journal of Veterinary Clinics / v.24, no.2, 2007 , pp. 77-81 More about this Journal
Abstract
Diagnostic performance of polymerase chain reaction (PCR) for detecting Dirofilaria immitis in dogs was evaluated when no gold standard test was employed. An enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay test kit (SnapTM, IDEXX, USA) with unknown parameters was also employed. The sensitivity and specificity of the PCR from two-population model were estimated by using both maximum likelihood using expectation-maximization (EM) algorithm and Bayesian method, assuming conditional independence between the two tests. A total of 266 samples, 133 samples in each trial, were randomly retrieved from the heartworm database records during the year 2002-2004 in a university animal hospital. These data originated from the test results of military dogs which were brought for routine medical check-up or testing for heartworm infection. When combined 2 trials, sensitivity and specificity of the PCR was 96.4-96.7% and 97.6-98.8% in EM and 94.4-94.8% and 97.1-98% in Bayesian. There were no statistical differences between estimates. This finding indicates that the PCR assay could be useful screening tool for detecting heartworm antigen in dogs. This study was provided further evidences that Bayesian approach is an alternative approach to draw better inference about the performance of a new diagnostic test in case when either gold test is not available.
Keywords
canine heartworm; PCR; diagnostic performance; Bayesian;
Citations & Related Records

Times Cited By SCOPUS : 0
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
1 Courtney CH, Zeng QY, Bean ES. Sensitivity and specificity of the Diro-$CHEK^{(R)}$ heartworm antigen test for immunodiagnosis of canine dirofilariasis and a comparison with other immunodiagnostic tests. J Am Anim Hosp Assoc 1988; 24: 27-32
2 Johnson WO, Gastwirth JL. Bayesian inference for medical screening tests: approximations useful for the analysis of acquired immune deficiency syndrome. J Roy Statist Soc Ser B 1991; 53: 427-439
3 Courtney CH, Zeng QY. Comparison of two antigen tests and the modified Knott's test for the detection of canine heartworm at different worm burdens. Canine Pract 1993; 18: 5-7
4 Dempster A, Laird N, Rubin D. Maximum likelihood from incomplete data via the EM algorithm. J Roy Stat Soc Ser B 1977; 39: 1-38
5 Ely ML, Courtney CH. Sensitivity and specificity of FilarochekiR) heartworm antigen test and Dirotect(R) heartworm antibody test for immunodiagnosis of canine filariasi. J Am Anim Hosp Assoc 1987; 23: 367-371
6 Faraone SV, Tsuang MT. Measuring diagnostic accuracy in the absence of a 'gold standard'. Am J Psychiatry 1994; 151: 650-657   DOI
7 Pak SI, Kim D, Salman M. Estimation of paratuberculosis prevalence in dairy cattle in a province of Korea using an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay: application of Bayesian approach. J Vet Sci 2003; 4: 51-56
8 Georgiadis MP, Gardner lA, Hedrick RP. Field evaluation of sensitivity and specificity of a polymerase chain reaction (PCR) for detection of Nucleospora salmonis in rainbow trout. J Aquat Anim Health 1998; 10: 372-380   DOI   ScienceOn
9 Johnson WO, Gastwirth JL, Pearson LM. Screening without a gold standard: the Hui-Walter paradigm revisited. Am J Epidemiol 2001; 153: 921-924   DOI   ScienceOn
10 Mar P, Yang I, Chang G, Fei AC. Specific polymerase chain reaction for differential diagnosis of Dirofilaria immitis and Dipetaloma reconditum using primers derived from internal transcribed spacer region 2 (ITS2). Vet Parasitol 2002; 106: 243-252   DOI   ScienceOn
11 Rosa A, Ribicich M, Betti A, Kistermann JC, Cardillo N, Basso N, Hallu R. Prevalence of canine dirofilariasis in the city of Buenos Aires and its outskirts (Argentina). Vet Parasitol 2002; 109: 261-264   DOI   ScienceOn
12 Vacek PM. The effect of conditional dependence on the evaluation of diagnostic tests. Biometrics 1985; 41: 959-968   DOI   ScienceOn
13 Watts KJ, Courtney CH, Reddy GR. Development of a PCR-based test for the sensitive and specific detection of the dog heartworm, Dirofilaria immitis, in its mosquito intermediate host. Mol Cell Probes 1999; 14: 425-430
14 Smith RD. Veterinary clinical epidemiology: a problem-oriented approach. 2nd ed. CRC Press: Boca Raton, 1995: 31-52
15 Favia G, Lanfrancotti A, Torre AD, Cancrini G, Coluzzi M. Polymerase chain reaction: identification of Dirofilaria repens and Dirofilaria immitis. Parasitol 1996; 113: 567-571   DOI
16 Brunner CJ, Hendrix CM, Blagburn BL, Hanrahan LA. Comparison of serologic tests for detection of antigen in canine heartwonn infections. J Am Vet Med Assoc 1988; 192: 14231427
17 Martin TE, Collins GH. Prevalence of Dirofilaria immitis and Dipetalonema reconditum in greyhounds. Aust Vet J 1985; 62: 159-163   DOI   ScienceOn
18 Choi BCK. Causal modeling to estimate sensitivity and specificity of a test when prevalence changes. Epidemiology 1997; 8: 80-86   DOI   ScienceOn
19 Gardner lA, Stryhn H, Lind P, Collins MT. Conditional dependence between tests affects the diagnosis and surveillance of animal diseases. Prev Vet Med 2000; 45: 107-122   DOI   ScienceOn
20 Hui SL, Walter SO. Estimating the error rates of diagnostic tests. Biometrics 1980; 36: 167-171   DOI   ScienceOn
21 Johnson WO, Gastwirth JL. Dual group screening. J Statist Plann Inference 2000; 83: 449-473   DOI   ScienceOn
22 Boelaert M, Aoun K, Liinev J, Goetghebeur E, van der Stuyft P. The potential of latent class analysis in diagnostic test validation for canine Leishmania infantum infection. Epidemiol Infect 1999; 123: 499-506   DOI   ScienceOn
23 Mendoza-Blanco JTX, Lyengar S. Bayesian inference on prevalence using a missing-data approach with simulation-based techniques: applications to HIV screening. Stat Med 1996; 15: 2161-2176   DOI   ScienceOn
24 Walter SO, Irwig LM. Estimation of test error rates, disease prevalence and relative risk from misclassified data: a review. J Clin Epidemiol 1988; 41; 923-937   DOI   ScienceOn
25 Song KH, Lee SE, Hayasaki M, Shiramizu K, Kim DH, Cho KW. Seroprevalence of canine dirofilariasis in South Korea. Vet Parasitol 2003; 114: 231-236   DOI   ScienceOn
26 Joseph L, Gyorkos TW, Coupal L. Bayesian estimation of disease prevalence and the parameters of diagnostic tests in the absence of a gold standard. Am J Epidemiol 1995; 141: 263-272   DOI
27 Tanner MA. Tools for statistical inference. In: Methods for the exploration of posterior distributions and likelihood functions. 3rd ed. Springer, New York, 1996: 78-79
28 Enoe C, Georgiadis MP, Johnson WO. Estimation of sensitivity and specificity of diagnostic tests and disease prevalence when the true disease state is unknown. Prev Vet Med 2000; 45: 61-81   DOI   ScienceOn
29 Courtney CH, Zeng QY. Comparison of heartworm antigen test kit performance in dogs having low heartworm burdens. Vet Parasitol 2001; 96: 317-322   DOI   ScienceOn
30 Alonzo TA, Pepe MS. Using a combination of reference tests to assess the accuracy of a new diagnostic test. Stat Med 1999; 18: 2987-3003   DOI   ScienceOn
31 Valenstein, P. N. Evaluating diagnostic tests with imperfect standards. Am J Clin Pathol 1990, 93: 252-258   DOI
32 Walter SO, Frommer DG, Cook RJ. The estimation of sensitivity and specificity in colorectal cancer screening methods. Cancer Detect Prev 1991; 15: 465-469