| Literature DB >> 26309724 |
Ian Hogan1, Michael Doherty2, John Fagan3, Emer Kennedy4, Muireann Conneely4, Paula Brady1, Clare Ryan1, Ingrid Lorenz5.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Failure of passive transfer of maternal immunity via colostrum can occur in the bovine, and a number of blood tests have been developed to test calves for this failure. It is not clear which test is most suitable for this purpose. The objective was to examine the most commonly used tests for failure of passive transfer and to decide which is most suitable for routine laboratory use. 126 serum samples were taken from calves of dairy cows after birth but prior to colostrum feeding, and at 48 h of age. Five different tests were compared against radial immunodiffusion which is considered the appropriate reference method. These tests were serum gamma-glutamyltransferase levels, serum protein levels, serum globulin levels, an enzyme linked immunosorbent assay and the zinc sulphate turbidity test.Entities:
Keywords: Calves; Disadvantages in practicality; Failure of passive transfer; Laboratory tests
Year: 2015 PMID: 26309724 PMCID: PMC4548692 DOI: 10.1186/s13620-015-0047-0
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Ir Vet J ISSN: 0368-0762 Impact factor: 2.146
Fig. 1The distribution of Immunnoglobulin G results from 126 samples from dairy calves,determined by radial immunodiffusion testing [63]. Levels less than 10 mg/ml (1000 mg/dL) are considered indicative of failure of passive transfer [1, 23, 38–40]
Performance of various tests in identifying failure of passive transfer, compared to radial immunodiffusion as a reference method, at the cut-off points recommended in the literature. The uniformly high sensitivity, and the widely varying specificity, may be noted. Positive and negative predictive values have been calculated based on the reported prevalence of FPT in Irish calves [14]
| Test | Recommended cut-off point | Sensitivity(95 % CI) | Specificity (95 % CI) | % of animals classified correctly | Positive predictive value | Negative predictive value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| GGT | 100 IU/L [ | 0.9726 (0.9045-0.9967) | 0.9811 (0.8993-0.9995) | 98 % | 0.9901 | 0.9486 |
| ELISA | 10 mg/ml [ | 0.9726 (0.9045-0.9967) | 0.9811 (0.8993-0.9995) | 98 % | 0.9901 | 0.9486 |
| Globulin | 20 mg/ml [ | 1.0000 (0.9507-1.0000) | 0.8491 (0.7241-0.9325) | 94 % | 0.9279 | 1.0000 |
| STP | 52 mg/ml [ | 1.0000 (0.9507-1.0000) | 0.5660 (0.4228-0.7016) | 82 % | 0.8173 | 1.0000 |
| ZST | 20 units [ | 0.9863 (0.9260-0.9997) | 0.3019 (0.1834-0.4434) | 70 % | 0.7328 | 0.9190 |
The degree of agreement (kappa) between various tests when carried out using the cut-off points recommended in the literature. Also shown are the McNemar’s χ2 statistics comparing the sensitivity and specificity of the tests. McNemar’s test did not return a result when comparing the Sp of GGT levels and the ELISA as the tests returned the exact same results in unaffected animals –the specificity was identical. The test did not return a result when comparing the Se of Globulin and STP levels for the same reason- the sensitivity of these tests was identical
| Recommended cut-off | Kappa | McNemar’s | McNemar’s |
|---|---|---|---|
| GGT v ELISA | 0.9676 | 0 | No result |
| GGT v Globulin | 0.8851 | 0.5 | 5.1 |
| ELISA v Globulin | 0.8511 | 0.5 | 5.1 |
| Globulin v STP | 0.7200 | No result | 13 |
| GGT v STP | 0.5882 | 0.5 | 20 |
| ELISA v STP | 0.5882 | 0.5 | 20 |
| GGT v ZST | 0.3089 | 0 | 34 |
| ELISA v ZST | 0.3089 | 0 | 34 |
| Globulin v ZST | 0.2378 | 0 | 21 |
| STP v ZST | 0.1518 | 0 | 5.3 |
Fig. 2Example of a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve, describing the performance of the zinc sulphate turbidity test [42]. Similar curves were created for all tests under examination
Cut-points determined, by use of receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve, to maximize either the sensitivity or the specificity of each test [42]. The area under the curve is a measure of the overall ability of the test to discriminate affected from unaffected animals [42]
| Test | Area under curve (AUC) | Cut-point (Target | Se | Sp | Cut-point (Target | Se | Sp |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| GGT | 0.996 | 3449.3 IU/L | 100.00 % | 0.00 % | 4.6 IU/L | 80.80 % | 100.00 % |
| ELISA | 0.989 | 21.9 mg/ml | 100.00 % | 73.60 % | 6.4 mg/ml | 97.30 % | 100.00 % |
| Globulin | 0.98 | 19.11 mg/ml | 100.00 % | 84.90 % | 12.65 mg/ml | 86.30 % | 100.00 % |
| STP | 0.894 | 48.9 mg/ml | 100.00 % | 69.80 % | 25.4 mg/ml | 21.90 % | 100.00 % |
| ZST | 0.875 | 21 units | 100.00 % | 24.50 % | 1 unit | 47.90 % | 100.00 % |
Performance of the tests at cut-off points deemed to return the maximum sum of sensitivity and specificity, as determined by receiver operating characteristic curves [42]. Positive and negative predictive values have been calculated based on the reported prevalence of FPT in Irish calves [14]
| Test | Cut-off to maximise correct classification | Sensitivity(95 % CI) | Specificity (95 % CI) | % of animals classified correctly | Positive predictive value | Negative predictive value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| GGT | 100 IU/L | 0.9726(0.9045–0.9967) | 0.9811(0.8993–0.9995) | 98 % | 0.9901 | 0.9486 |
| ELISA | 8 mg/ml | 0.9726(0.9045–0.9967) | 1.0000(0.9328–1.0000) | 98 % | 1.0000 | 0.9758 |
| Globulin | 16 mg/ml | 0.9863(0.9260–0.9997) | 0.8868(0.7697–0.9573) | 94 % | 0.9442 | 0.9709 |
| STP | 45 mg/ml | 0.9726(0.9045–0.9967) | 0.7358(0.5967–0.8474) | 87 % | 0.8772 | 0.9326 |
| ZST | 11 units | 0.8082(0.6992–0.8910) | 0.8302(0.7020–0.9193) | 82 % | 0.9023 | 0.6904 |
The degree of agreement (kappa) between various tests when carried out at cut-off points deemed to return the maximum sum of sensitivity and specificity, as determined by receiver operating characteristic curves [42]. Also shown are the McNemar’s χ2 statistics comparing the sensitivity and specificity of the tests. McNemar’s test did not return a result when comparing the Sp of GGT levels and the ELISA as the tests returned the exact same results in unaffected animals –the specificity was identical
| Optimum cut-off | Kappa | McNemar’s | McNemar’s |
|---|---|---|---|
| GGT v ELISA | 0.9676 | 0 | No result |
| GGT v Globulin | 0.9014 | 0 | 3.2 |
| ELISA v Globulin | 0.8685 | 0 | 3.2 |
| Globulin v STP | 0.8096 | 0 | 6.1 |
| GGT v STP | 0.7160 | 0 | 11 |
| ELISA v STP | 0.7160 | 0 | 11 |
| ELISA v ZST | 0.6957 | 7.7 | 6.1 |
| GGT v ZST | 0.6688 | 10 | 6.1 |
| Globulin v ZST | 0.5917 | 11 | 0.3077 |
| STP v ZST | 0.4613 | 7.6 | 0.9412 |