The efficacy of a commercial ELISA as an alternative to virus neutralisation test for the detection of antibodies to EAV.

The research paper addresses the performance of a commercially available ELISA test in detecting antibodies to EAV (Equine Arteritis Virus in horses) compared to the traditional virus neutralisation test. The ELISA test performed at an unsatisfactory level, exhibiting a poor specificity and high sensitivity; hence, it was deemed unsuitable for quickening sample testing times.

Objective and Methodology

• The objective of this research was to evaluate the effectiveness of a commercially available ELISA (Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay) test as a possible replacement to the traditional virus neutralisation test for detecting antibodies to EAV (Equine Arteritis Virus).
• Infection with EAV is a reportable disease in the UK with periodic occurrences and horses, particularly stallions, can turn into carriers after infection.
• The conventional virus neutralisation test, despite being considered the ‘gold standard’ in serological screening, is time-consuming and labour intensive, leading to potential delays in disease reporting.
• The researchers ran an EVA antibody ELISA test on various samples to study its efficiency.

Results

• Results demonstrated that the commercially available ELISA test was inadequate for the task, showing a low specificity of 26% which denotes the high frequency of false positives, thus hampering the reliability of the test.
• In contrast, the test displayed a high sensitivity of 96%, indicating that it was capable of correctly identifying horses that were infected.

Conclusion

• Consequently, the research concluded that the ELISA test had minimal value in reducing the time required for sample testing due to its low specificity.
• The study highlights the importance of validating the effectiveness of commercially available kits in-house, before adopting them for regular use, to avoid difficulties and inaccuracies in detecting diseases.