Use of recombinant malate dehydrogenase (MDH) and superoxide dismutase (SOD) [CuZn] as antigens in indirect ELISA for diagnosis of bovine brucellosis

Rafaella Silva Andrade,Angélica Rosa Faria,Hélida Monteiro Andrade,Júlio Sílvio de Sousa Bueno Filho,Herman Sander Mansur,Alexandra Ancelmo Piscitelli Mansur,Andrey Pereira Lage,Elaine Maria Seles Dorneles
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mimet.2023.106874
Abstract:The objective of this study was to validate an indirect enzyme-linked immunoassay (iELISA) using the recombinant proteins, malate dehydrogenase (MDH) and superoxide dismutase (SOD) [CuZn], as antigens and to evaluate its ability to discriminate antibodies produced by vaccination from those induced by infection in the diagnosis of bovine brucellosis. Sera from six groups were evaluated: G1 - culture-positive animals (52 serum samples) (naturally infected); G2 - non-vaccinated animals (28 serum samples) positive in RBT (Rose Bengal test) and 2ME (2-mercaptoethanol test) selected from brucellosis-positive herds; G3 - animals from a brucellosis-free area (32 serum samples); G4 - S19 vaccinated heifers (114 serum samples); G5 - RB51 vaccinated heifers (60 serum samples); G6 - animals inoculated with inactivated Yersinia enterocolitica O:9 (42 serum samples). Diagnostic sensitivity (DSe) and diagnostic specificity (DSp) were estimated using the frequentist approach and the confidence interval (CI) (95%) calculated by the Clopper-Pearson (exact) method. The DSe for iELISA_MDH in the G1 group was 71.7% (CI 95%: 57.6-83.2%) and for the G2 100.0% (CI 95%: 87.7-100.0%), whereas the DSp was 84.4% in the G3 (CI 95%: 67.2-94.7%). For the iELISA_SOD the DSe was estimated 67.3% for the G1 (CI 95%: 52.9-79.7%) and 71.4% for G2 (CI 95%: 51.3-86.8%), while the DSp for G3 was 87.5% (CI 95%: 71.0-96.5%). iELISA_MDH and iELISA_SOD showed potential to be used in the diagnosis of infected animals, increasing the range of serological tests available for the diagnosis of bovine brucellosis, with the advantage of being S-LPS-free. However, none of the tests could differentiate between infection and vaccination.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?