Comparison of biotinylated monoclonal and polyclonal antibodies in an evaluation of a direct rapid immunohistochemical test for the routine diagnosis of rabies in southern Africa

Show simple item record Coetzer, Andre Sabeta, Claude Taurai Markotter, Wanda Rupprecht, Charles Edward Nel, Louis Hendrik 2015-02-11T08:25:37Z 2015-02-11T08:25:37Z 2014-09
dc.description.abstract The major etiological agent of rabies, rabies virus (RABV), accounts for tens of thousands of human deaths per annum. The majority of these deaths are associated with rabies cycles in dogs in resource-limited countries of Africa and Asia. Although routine rabies diagnosis plays an integral role in disease surveillance and management, the application of the currently recommended direct fluorescent antibody (DFA) test in countries on the African and Asian continents remains quite limited. A novel diagnostic assay, the direct rapid immunohistochemical test (dRIT), has been reported to have a diagnostic sensitivity and specificity equal to that of the DFA test while offering advantages in cost, time and interpretation. Prior studies used the dRIT utilized monoclonal antibody (MAb) cocktails. The objective of this study was to test the hypothesis that a biotinylated polyclonal antibody (PAb) preparation, applied in the dRIT protocol, would yield equal or improved results compared to the use of dRIT with MAbs. We also wanted to compare the PAb dRIT with the DFA test, utilizing the same PAb preparation with a fluorescent label. The PAb dRIT had a diagnostic sensitivity and specificity of 100%, which was shown to be marginally higher than the diagnostic efficacy observed for the PAb DFA test. The classical dRIT, relying on two-biotinylated MAbs, was applied to the same panel of samples and a reduced diagnostic sensitivity (83.50% and 90.78% respectively) was observed. Antigenic typing of the false negative samples indicated all of these to be mongoose RABV variants. Our results provided evidence that a dRIT with alternative antibody preparations, conjugated to a biotin moiety, has a diagnostic efficacy equal to that of a DFA relying on the same antibody and that the antibody preparation should be optimized for virus variants specific to the geographical area of focus. en_ZA
dc.description.librarian hb2015 en_ZA
dc.description.sponsorship National Research Foundation (NRF; Grant number: 66187), Poliomyelitis Research Foundation (PRF; Grant number: 12/38 [MSc]) and the European Virus Archive project (EVA; Grant number: 04/17/c215). en_ZA
dc.description.uri en_ZA
dc.identifier.citation Coetzer A, Sabeta CT, Markotter W, Rupprecht CE, Nel LH (2014) Comparison of Biotinylated Monoclonal and Polyclonal Antibodies in an Evaluation of a Direct Rapid Immunohistochemical Test for the Routine Diagnosis of Rabies in Southern Africa. Plos Neglected Tropical Diseases 8(9): e3189. doi:10.1371/journal.pntd.0003189. en_ZA
dc.identifier.issn 1935-2727 (print)
dc.identifier.issn 1935-2735 (online)
dc.identifier.other 10.1371/journal.pntd.0003189
dc.language.iso en en_ZA
dc.publisher Public Library of Science en_ZA
dc.rights © 2014 The Authors. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. en_ZA
dc.subject Rabies en_ZA
dc.subject Southern Africa en_ZA
dc.subject Rabies virus (RABV) en_ZA
dc.subject Biotinylated polyclonal antibody (PAb) en_ZA
dc.subject Direct rapid immunohistochemical test (dRIT) en_ZA
dc.subject Monoclonal antibody (MAb) en_ZA
dc.title Comparison of biotinylated monoclonal and polyclonal antibodies in an evaluation of a direct rapid immunohistochemical test for the routine diagnosis of rabies in southern Africa en_ZA
dc.type Article en_ZA

Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record