Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 197
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 197
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 271
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3165
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 597
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 511
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 317
Function: require_once
98%
921
2 minutes
20
Feline infectious peritonitis (FIP) is a fatal disease in cats that is caused by feline coronavirus (FCoV). FCoV RT-qPCR is widely used to diagnose FIP due to its high sensitivity and ability to quantify FCoV RNA. However, its convenience is limited by the need for expensive equipment and/or processing at external laboratories. We herein developed two rapid and simple FCoV RNA detection systems: one combining conventional RT-PCR with the Single Tag Hybridization-Printed Array Strip (STH-PAS) method (the RT-PCR and STH-PAS system) and the other combining RT-RPA, an isothermal nucleic acid amplification method, with STH-PAS (the RT-RPA and STH-PAS system). Evaluations using FCoV RNA standards showed that the limit of detection for the RT-PCR and STH-PAS system was 10 copies/reaction, while that for the RT-RPA and STH-PAS system was 10 copies/reaction. The clinical performance of these systems was also examined using clinical samples from cats suspected of having FIP and compared to the conventional FCoV RT-qPCR genetic test. The results obtained showed a sensitivity of 66.7 % (95 % CI: 41.0-86.7) and specificity of 100 % (95 %CI: 9.4-100). These systems are a faster and simpler alternative to conventional methods, suggesting their potential in point-of-care testing in veterinary clinics.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jviromet.2025.115214 | DOI Listing |