A Study on the Analytical Sensitivity of 6 BSE Tests Used by the Canadian BSE Reference Laboratory
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) surveillance programs have been employed in numerous countries to monitor BSE prevalence and to protect animal and human health. Since 1999, the European Commission (EC) authorized the evaluation and approval of 20 molecular based tests for the rapid detection of the pathological prion protein (PrP(sc)) in BSE infection. The diagnostic sensitivity, convenience, and speed of these tests have made molecular diagnostics the preferred method for BSE surveillance. The aim of this study was to determine the analytical sensitivity of 4 commercially available BSE rapid-test kits, including the Prionics®-Check WESTERN, the Prionics® Check-PrioSTRIP™, the BioRad® TeSeE™ ELISA, and the IDEXX® HerdChek™ EIA. Performances of these tests were then compared to 2 confirmatory tests, including the BioRad® TeSeE™ Western Blot and the modified Scrapie Associated Fibrils (SAF)/OIE Immunoblot. One 50% w/v homogenate was made from experimentally generated C-type BSE brain tissues in ddH₂O. Homogenates were diluted through a background of BSE-negative brainstem homogenate. Masses of both positive and negative tissues in each dilution were calculated to maintain the appropriate tissue amounts for each test platform. Specific concentrated homogenization buffer was added accordingly to maintain the correct buffer condition for each test. ELISA-based tests were evaluated using their respective software/detection platforms. Blot-protocols were evaluated by manual measurements of blot signal density. Detection limitations were determined by fitted curves intersecting the manufacturers' positive/negative criteria. The confirmatory SAF Immunoblot displayed the highest analytical sensitivity, followed by the IDEXX® HerdChek™ EIA, Bio-Rad® TeSeE™ Western Blot, the Bio-Rad® TeSeE™ ELISA, Prionics®-Check PrioSTRIP™, and Prionics®-Check WESTERN™, respectively. Although the tests performed at different levels of sensitivity, the most sensitive and least sensitive of the rapid tests were separated by 2 logs in analytical sensitivity, meeting European performance requirements. All rapid tests appear suitable for targeted BSE surveillance programs, as implemented in Canada.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.014 | 0.022 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".