Table C.1.
Summary data on performance of RT for the detection of CWD extracted from the scientific literature
| Reported status | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Positive samples | Negative samples | ||||||||||
| Test | Species | Tissue | IHC +ve | Presumed negativea | Total | Test result | Se % | 95 C.I. % | Sp % | 95 C.I. % | Reference |
| Bio‐Rad TeSeE WB | Wapiti, mule deer, WTD | Obex | 35 | 0 | 35 | Positive | 87.5% | 73.8–94.5% | 100% | 61–100% | Blasche et al. (2011) |
| 5 | 6 | 11 | Negative | ||||||||
| 40 | 6 | 46 | Total | ||||||||
| Bio‐Rad TeSeE ELISA | Wapiti, mule deer, WTD | Obex | 29 | 0 | 29 | Positive | 72.5% | 57.1–83.9% | 100% | 98.8–100% | Blasche et al. (2011) |
| 11 | 320 | 331 | Negative | ||||||||
| 40 | 320 | 360 | Total | ||||||||
| Bio‐Rad TeSeE s/g ELISA | Wapiti, mule deer, WTD | obex | 34 | 87 | 121 | Positive | 85% | 70.9–92.9% | 91.7% | 89.8–93.2% | Blasche et al. (2011) |
| 6 | 945 | 951 | Negative | ||||||||
| 40 | 1,032 | 1,072 | Total | ||||||||
| Bio‐Rad TeSeE WB | Wapiti, mule deer, WTD | LN | 37 | 0 | 37 | Positive | 100% | 90.5–100% | 100% | 56.5–100% | Blasche et al. (2011) |
| 0 | 5 | 5 | Negative | ||||||||
| 37 | 5 | 42 | Total | ||||||||
| Bio‐Rad TeSeE ELISA | Wapiti, mule deer, WTD | LN | 29 | 0 | 29 | Positive | 78.4% | 62.8–88.6% | 100% | 98.8–100% | Blasche et al. (2011) |
| 8 | 320 | 328 | Negative | ||||||||
| 37 | 320 | 357 | Total | ||||||||
| Bio‐Rad TeSeE s/g ELISA | Wapiti, mule deer, WTD | LN | 39 | 0 | 39 | Positive | 97.5% | 87.1–99.5% | 100% | 99.6–100% | Blasche et al. (2011) |
| 1 | 1,080 | 1,081 | Negative | ||||||||
| 40 | 1,080 | 1,120 | Total | ||||||||
| IHC +ve | IHC −ve | Total | Test result | ||||||||
| Bio‐Rad | Mule deer | RPLN | 59 | 0 | 59 | Positive | 98.3% | 91.1–99.7% | 100% | 99.6–100% | Hibler et., (2003) |
| 1 | 1,097 | 1,098 | Negative | ||||||||
| 60 | 1,097 | 1,157 | Total | ||||||||
| Wapiti | RPLN | 21 | 1 | 22 | Positive | 100% | 84.5–100% | 99.87% | 99.3–99.9% | Hibler et al. (2003) | |
| 0 | 814 | 814 | Negative | ||||||||
| 21 | 815 | 836 | Total | ||||||||
| WTD | RPLN | 3 | 0 | 3 | Positive | 100% | 43.8–100% | 100% | 97.1–100% | Hibler et al. (2003) | |
| 0 | 130 | 130 | Negative | ||||||||
| 3 | 130 | 133 | Total | ||||||||
| Bio‐Rad | Mule deer | obex | 35 | 0 | 35 | Positive | 92.1% | 79.2–97.2% | 100% | 99.6–100% | Hibler et al. (2003) |
| 3 | 958 | 961 | Negative | ||||||||
| 38 | 958 | 996 | Total | ||||||||
| Wapiti | Obex | 14 | 0 | 14 | Positive | 93.3% | 70.2–98.8% | 100% | 99.6–100% | Hibler et al. (2003) | |
| 1 | 1,028 | 1,029 | Negative | ||||||||
| 15 | 1,028 | 1,043 | Total | ||||||||
| WTD | Obex | 0 | 0 | 0 | Positive | – | – | 100% | 72.2–100% | Hibler et al. (2003) | |
| 0 | 10 | 10 | Negative | ||||||||
| 0 | 10 | 10 | Total | ||||||||
| IDEXX HerdChek CWD | Roe deer | Brain | 0 | 0 | 0 | Positive | – | – | 100% | 98.35–100% | De Bosschere et al. (2006) |
| 0 | 222 | 222 | Negative | ||||||||
| 0 | 222 | 222 | Total | ||||||||
| IDEXX HerdChek CWD | Roe deer | Spleen | 0 | 0 | 0 | Positive | – | – | 100% | 83.23–100% | De Bosschere et al. (2006) |
| 0 | 206 | 206 | Negative | ||||||||
| 0 | 206 | 206 | Total | ||||||||
a
Negative samples originated from Germany.