Further Evidence of Inadequate Quality in Lateral Flow Devices Commercially Offered for the Diagnosis of Rabies

Author:

Klein Antonia,Fahrion Anna,Finke StefanORCID,Eyngor Marina,Novak Shiri,Yakobson Boris,Ngoepe Ernest,Phahladira Baby,Sabeta Claude,De Benedictis PaolaORCID,Gourlaouen Morgane,Orciari Lillian A.,Yager Pamela A.,Gigante Crystal M.ORCID,Knowles M. Kimberly,Fehlner-Gardiner Christine,Servat AlexandreORCID,Cliquet FlorenceORCID,Marston Denise,McElhinney Lorraine M.ORCID,Johnson Trudy,Fooks Anthony R.,Müller ThomasORCID,Freuling Conrad M.ORCID

Abstract

As a neglected zoonotic disease, rabies causes approximately 5.9 × 104 human deaths annually, primarily affecting low- and middle-income countries in Asia and Africa. In those regions, insufficient surveillance is hampering adequate medical intervention and is driving the vicious cycle of neglect. Where resources to provide laboratory disease confirmation are limited, there is a need for user-friendly and low-cost reliable diagnostic tools that do not rely on specialized laboratory facilities. Lateral flow devices (LFD) offer an alternative to conventional diagnostic methods and may strengthen control efforts in low-resource settings. Five different commercially available LFDs were compared in a multi-centered study with respect to their diagnostic sensitivity and their agreement with standard rabies diagnostic techniques. Our evaluation was conducted by several international reference laboratories using a broad panel of samples. The overall sensitivities ranged from 0% up to 62%, depending on the LFD manufacturer, with substantial variation between the different laboratories. Samples with high antigen content and high relative viral load tended to test positive more often in the Anigen/Bionote test, the latter being the one with the best performance. Still, the overall unsatisfactory findings corroborate a previous study and indicate a persistent lack of appropriate test validation and quality control. At present, the tested kits are not suitable for in-field use for rabies diagnosis, especially not for suspect animals where human contact has been identified, as an incorrect negative diagnosis may result in human casualties. This study points out the discrepancy between the enormous need for such a diagnostic tool on the one hand, and on the other hand, a number of already existing tests that are not yet ready for use.

Publisher

MDPI AG

Subject

Infectious Diseases,Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health,General Immunology and Microbiology

Reference39 articles.

1. Estimating the Global Burden of Endemic Canine Rabies

2. WHO expert consultation on rabies, third report;World Health Organ. Tech. Rep. Ser.,2018

3. Rabies

4. Taxonomy of the order Mononegavirales: update 2018

5. Replication strategies of rabies virus

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3