Cho, Sun-Hyung
(Veterinary Medical Center, College of Veterinary Medicine, Chungbuk National University)
,
Kang, Ji-Houn
(Veterinary Medical Center, College of Veterinary Medicine, Chungbuk National University)
,
Yang, Mhan-Pyo
(Veterinary Medical Center, College of Veterinary Medicine, Chungbuk National University)
,
Kang, Byeong-Teck
(Veterinary Medical Center, College of Veterinary Medicine, Chungbuk National University)
This study was undertaken to identify differences between atopic and non-atopic dogs in three rapid screening immunodot assays as well as the ability of the assays to predict the results of intradermal skin testing (IDST) or Favrot diagnostic criteria (FDC). Twenty-nine dogs diagnosed with canine at...
This study was undertaken to identify differences between atopic and non-atopic dogs in three rapid screening immunodot assays as well as the ability of the assays to predict the results of intradermal skin testing (IDST) or Favrot diagnostic criteria (FDC). Twenty-nine dogs diagnosed with canine atopic dermatitis (CAD) were selected as the atopic group. Twenty-five dogs without CAD were included as the non-atopic group. Three types of immunodot assays were conducted on all serum samples from both groups: Allercept E-screen 2nd generation (ES2G), Canine Allergic Tendency Reference Test (ALERT), and Asan Easy Test Canine IgE (AETC). IDST, which included 39 allergens, and immunodot assays were performed concurrently in 13 dogs from the atopic group and compared. While there were no significant differences in positivity between the two groups in the evaluation of ALERT (P = 0.435) and AETC (P = 0.313), positivity in ES2G testing was significantly higher in the non-atopic group than the atopic group (P = 0.038). The ES2G, ALERT, and AETC results showed fair (${\kappa}=0.235$), slight (${\kappa}=0.133$), and slight (${\kappa}=0.014$) accordance with IDST, respectively. The outcomes of ES2G, ALERT, and AETC indicated poor (${\kappa}=-0.211$), slight (${\kappa}=0.106$), and slight (${\kappa}=0.087$) agreement with FDC. In conclusion, rapid screening immunodot assays were not useful for the diagnosis of CAD. These assays may provide a supplementary method for predicting the results of IDST in atopic dogs.
This study was undertaken to identify differences between atopic and non-atopic dogs in three rapid screening immunodot assays as well as the ability of the assays to predict the results of intradermal skin testing (IDST) or Favrot diagnostic criteria (FDC). Twenty-nine dogs diagnosed with canine atopic dermatitis (CAD) were selected as the atopic group. Twenty-five dogs without CAD were included as the non-atopic group. Three types of immunodot assays were conducted on all serum samples from both groups: Allercept E-screen 2nd generation (ES2G), Canine Allergic Tendency Reference Test (ALERT), and Asan Easy Test Canine IgE (AETC). IDST, which included 39 allergens, and immunodot assays were performed concurrently in 13 dogs from the atopic group and compared. While there were no significant differences in positivity between the two groups in the evaluation of ALERT (P = 0.435) and AETC (P = 0.313), positivity in ES2G testing was significantly higher in the non-atopic group than the atopic group (P = 0.038). The ES2G, ALERT, and AETC results showed fair (${\kappa}=0.235$), slight (${\kappa}=0.133$), and slight (${\kappa}=0.014$) accordance with IDST, respectively. The outcomes of ES2G, ALERT, and AETC indicated poor (${\kappa}=-0.211$), slight (${\kappa}=0.106$), and slight (${\kappa}=0.087$) agreement with FDC. In conclusion, rapid screening immunodot assays were not useful for the diagnosis of CAD. These assays may provide a supplementary method for predicting the results of IDST in atopic dogs.
* AI 자동 식별 결과로 적합하지 않은 문장이 있을 수 있으니, 이용에 유의하시기 바랍니다.
대상 데이터
A total of 54 dogs who presented to Veterinary Medical Center, Chungbuk National University between February 2013 and June 2015 were included in this study and divided into two groups: atopic (n = 29) and non-atopic (n = 25). Serum samples were collected for the diagnostic procedures, and then stored at −80℃.
데이터처리
Positive rapid screening immunodot assay results were compared between the two groups using a chi-square test. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and the κ (kappa) coefficient were calculated to evaluate the agreement between IDST or FDC and immunodot assays (Microsoft Excel 2013; Microsoft, USA).
Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and the κ (kappa) coefficient were calculated to evaluate the agreement between IDST or FDC and immunodot assays (Microsoft Excel 2013; Microsoft, USA).
성능/효과
All three types of immunodot assays in this study had high positive and low negative predictive values for the findings of IDST. Therefore, a positive initial reaction in the ES2G, ALERT, or AETC, but not a negative reaction on these immunodot assays, may provide cause to perform subsequent IDST.
In conclusion, a combination of rapid screening immunodot assays was not useful for the diagnosis of CAD. These assays may provide a supplementary method for predicting the results of IDST in atopic dogs.
In this study, the ES2G results were in fair agreement with IDST, whereas the ALERT and AETC had only a slight accordance with IDST. A previous study in the United States showed a moderate agreement between IDST and ES2G (16).
3%) in the AETC. Interestingly, the specificity and positive predictive values were 100% in all three types of immunodot assays, whereas negative predictive values ranged from 8.3% to 20%. The agreement between IDST results and those for ES2G, ALERT, and AETC were fair (κ = 0.
The agreement between IDST results and those for ES2G, ALERT, and AETC were fair (κ = 0.235), slight (κ = 0.133), and slight (κ = 0.014), respectively.
0%). The highest positive predictive value was shown in AETC (71.4%), followed by ALERT (58.6%), and ES2G (47.8%). Negative predictive values ranged from 12.
The results of a comparison between immunodot assays and FDC in 54 dogs from both groups are presented in Table 3. The highest sensitivity was observed in ES2G (75.9%), whereas AETC had the highest specificity (92.0%). The highest positive predictive value was shown in AETC (71.
The outcomes of ES2G, ALERT, and AETC appeared to have poor, slight and slight agreement with those of FDC, respectively. These lower levels of agreement indicate that immunodot assays are insufficient to predict the results of FDC.
The outcomes of ES2G, ALERT, and AETC indicated poor (κ = −0.211), slight (κ = 0.106), and slight (κ = 0.087) agreement with FDC, respectively.
This study demonstrated that the presence of serum IgE in three rapid screening immunodot assays would not be sufficient for diagnosis of CAD. While these immunodot assays presented a low rate of agreement with FDC, they had a fair to slight degree of agreement with IDST.
참고문헌 (19)
DeBoer DJ, Hillier A. The ACVD task force on canine atopic dermatitis (XVI): laboratory evaluation of dogs with atopic dermatitis with serum-based "allergy" tests. Vet Immunol Immunopathol 2001; 81: 277-287.
Diesel A, DeBoer DJ. Serum allergen-specific immunoglobulin E in atopic and healthy cats: comparison of a rapid screening immunoassay and complete-panel analysis. Vet Dermatol 2011; 22: 39-45.
Favrot C, Steffan J, Seewald W, Picco F. A prospective study on the clinical features of chronic canine atopic dermatitis and its diagnosis. Vet Dermatol 2010; 21: 23-31.
Foster AP, Littlewood JD, Webb P, Wood JLN, Rogers K, Shaw SE. Comparison of intradermal and serum testing for allergen-specific IgE using a $Fc{\varepsilon}RI{\alpha}$ -based assay in atopic dogs in the UK. Vet Immunol Immunopathol 2003; 93: 51-60.
German AJ, Hall EJ, Day MJ. Measurement of IgG, IgM and IgA concentrations in canine serum, saliva, tears and bile. Vet Immunol Immunopathol 1998; 64: 107-121.
Halliwell REW, Gilbert SM, Lian TM. Induced and spontaneous IgE antibodies to Dermatophagoides farinae in dogs and cats: evidence of functional heterogeneity of IgE. Vet Dermatol 1998; 9: 179-184.
Hill PB, Moriello KA, DeBoer DJ. Concentrations of total serum IgE, IgA, and IgG in atopic and parasitized dogs. Vet Immunol Immunopathol 1995; 44: 105-113.
Lee Y, Kang JH, Jung DI, Jin YB, Lee SR, Yang MP, Kang BT. Comparison of rapid screening immunoassay and intradermal test for canine atopic dermatitis. J Biomed Res 2015; 16: 115-120.
Le Roy L, Le Poder S, Desquilbet L, Perrot S, Cavana P, Marignac G. Canine atopic dermatitis diagnostic criteria: evaluation of four sets of published criteria among veterinary students. J Vet Med Educ 2015; 42: 79-84.
Olivry T, DeBoer DJ, Griffin CE, Halliwell RE, Hill PB, Hillier A, Marsella R, Sousa CA. The ACVD task force on canine atopic dermatitis: forewords and lexicon. Vet Immunol Immunopathol 2001; 81: 143-146.
Olivry T, Paps J. Evaluation of the agreement between allergen specific intradermal or IgE serological tests and a point-ofcare immunodot assay in dogs with atopic dermatitis. Vet Dermatol 2011; 22: 284-285.
Park S, Ohya F, Yamashita K, Nishifuji K, Iwasaki T. Comparison of response to immunotherapy by intradermal skin test and antigen-specific IgE in canine atopy. J Vet Med Sci 2000; 62: 983-988.
Zur G, Ihrke PJ, White SD, Kass PH. Canine atopic dermatitis: a retrospective study of 266 cases examined at the University of California, Davis, 1992-1998. Part I. Clinical features and allergy testing results. Vet Dermatol 2002; 13: 89-102.
※ AI-Helper는 부적절한 답변을 할 수 있습니다.