Sensitivity And Specificity Of A Rapid Immunochromatographic Test For Detecting Anti-Campylobacter Antibodies In Native Chicken Serum Compared With Culture Isolation

Anwar Rosyidi, Zainul Muttaqin

Abstract


Campylobacter jejuni contributes significantly to childhood diarrheal disease in low- and middle-income countries. Although severe systemic complications can occur following Campylobacter infection, the best-established post-infectious complications include Guillain–Barré syndrome and reactive arthritis rather than hemolytic uremic syndrome or thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura.

This study aimed to evaluate the sensitivity and specificity of a rapid immunochromatographic test developed for the serological detection of Campylobacter in native chickens, using bacterial culture as the reference method. Serum and cecal content samples were collected from 28 native chickens. Serum samples were tested using the immunochromatographic assay to detect antibodies against Campylobacter, while cecal contents were subjected to bacterial culture for Campylobacter isolation. The results of the two methods were compared to determine diagnostic sensitivity, specificity, and agreement using Cohen’s kappa coefficient.The developed immunochromatographic test, optimized at an antigen concentration of 1.5 ng/µL and a serum volume of 10 µL, demonstrated a sensitivity of 70% and a specificity of 100%. The test showed substantial agreement with the bacterial culture method, with a kappa coefficient of 0.74. These findings suggest that the developed immunochromatographic test has potential as a rapid and practical screening tool for Campylobacter antibodies in native chickens. However, further optimization is needed to improve its sensitivity before routine diagnostic application.


Keywords


Campylobacter, immunochromatographic test, native chicken, sensitivity, kappa test

Full Text:

PDF

References


Adzitey, F., Huda, N., and Ali, G.R.R. 2022. Current methodologies and future direction of Campylobacter isolation and detection from food matrices, clinical samples, and the agricultural environment. Microorganisms, 10(4), 782. https://doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms10040782

Awad, W.A., Molnár, A., Aschenbach, J. R., Applegate, T. J. 2021. Characterizing the immune response of chickens to Campylobacter jejuni (Strain A74C). PLOS ONE, 16(3), e0249774. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0249774

Bahadır, E.B., and Sezgintürk, M.K. 2016. Lateral flow assays: Principles, designs and labels. TrAC Trends in Analytical Chemistry, 82, 286–306. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trac.2016.06.006

Callaghan, T. J., Lau, C. L., Doi, S. A., Smith, J. J., Kennedy, U., Powell-Romero, F., Vilcins, D., Cobbold, R.N., Jennison, A.V., Chakma, S., Sherlock, R., and Soares Magalhães, R.J. 2026. Global frequency of Campylobacter-associated hospitalisations: A systematic review and meta-analyses. Journal of Infection, 92(3), 106695. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jinf.2026.106695

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). 2024. About Campylobacter infection. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. CDC – About Campylobacter infection

Dogan, O. B., Aditya, A., Ortuzar, J., Clarke, J. and Wang, B. 2022. A systematic review and meta-analysis of the efficacy of processing stages and interventions for controlling Campylobacter contamination during broiler chicken processing. Comprehensive Reviews in Food Science and Food Safety, 21(1), 227–271. https://doi.org/10.1111/1541-4337.12860

El-Saadony, M.T., Saad, A.M., Yang, T., Salem, H.M., Korma, S.A., Ahmed, A.E., Mosa, W.F.A., Abd El-Mageed, T.A., Selim, S., Al Jaouni, S.K., Zaghloul, R.A., El-Hack, M.E.A., El-Tarabily, K.A. and Ibrahim, S.A. 2023. Avian campylobacteriosis, prevalence, sources, hazards, antibiotic resistance, poultry meat contamination, and control measures: A comprehensive review. Poultry Science, 102(9), 102786. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psj.2023.102786

Gichure, J.N., Njage, P.M.K., Wambui, J.M., Dykes, G.A., Buys, E.M. and Coorey, R. 2022. Systematic-review and meta-analysis on effect of decontamination interventions on prevalence and concentration of Campylobacter spp. during primary processing of broiler chickens. Food Microbiology, 102, 103923. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fm.2021.103923

Hermans, D., Pasmans, F., Heyndrickx, M., Martel, A., Van Deun, K. and Haesebrouck, F. 2012. A tolerogenic mucosal immune response leads to persistent Campylobacter jejuni colonization in the chicken gut. Critical Reviews in Microbiology, 38(1), 17–29. https://doi.org/10.3109/1040841X.2011.615298

Kemper, L., and Hensel, A. 2023. Campylobacter jejuni: Targeting host cells, adhesion, invasion, and survival. Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology, 107(9), 2725–2754. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00253-023-12456-w

Kotloff, K.L. 2017. The burden and etiology of diarrheal illness in developing countries. Pediatric Clinics of North America, 64(4), 799–814. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pcl.2017.03.006

Llarena, A.K., Skjerve, E., Bjørkøy, S., Forseth, M., Winge, J., Hauge, S. J., Johannessen, G. S., Spilsberg, B. and Nagel-Alne, G. E. 2022. Rapid detection of Campylobacter spp. in chickens before slaughter. Food Microbiology, 103, 103949. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fm.2021.103949

McHugh, M.L. 2012. Interrater reliability: The kappa statistic. Biochemia Medica, 22(3), 276–282.

Mughini-Gras, L., Pijnacker, R., Coipan, C., Mulder, A.C., Fernandes Veludo, A., de Rijk, S., van Pelt, W., and Franz, E. 2019. Source attribution of human campylobacteriosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Eurosurveillance, 24(43), 1800696. https://doi.org/10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2019.24.43.1800696

Newell, D.G. and Fearnley, C. 2003. Sources of Campylobacter colonization in broiler chickens. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 69(8), 4343–4351. https://doi.org/10.1128/AEM.69.8.4343-4351.2003

Posthuma-Trumpie, G.A., Korf, J., and van Amerongen, A. 2009. Lateral flow (immuno)assay: Its strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats. A literature survey. Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry, 393(2), 569–582. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00216-008-2287-2

Ross, G.M.S., Filippini, D., Nielen, M.W.F. and Salentijn, G. I. J. (2020). Unraveling the hook effect: A comprehensive study of high antigen concentration effects in sandwich lateral flow immunoassays. Analytical Chemistry, 92(23), 15587–15595. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.analchem.0c03740

Scallan Walter, E.J., Cui, Z., Tierney, R., Griffin, P.M., Hoekstra, R.M., Payne, D.C., Rose, E.B., Devine, C., Namwase, A.S., Mirza, S.A., Kambhampati, A.K., Straily, A., and Bruce, B.B. 2025. Foodborne illness acquired in the United States—Major pathogens, 2019. Emerging Infectious Diseases, 31(4), 669–677. https://doi.org/10.3201/eid3104.240913

Tikhomirova, A., McNabb, E.R., Petterlin, L., Bellamy, G.L., Lin, K.H., Santoso, C.A., Daye, E.S., Alhaddad, F.M., Lee, K.P. and Roujeinikova, A. 2024. Campylobacter jejuni virulence factors: Update on emerging issues and trends. Journal of Biomedical Science, 31(1), 45. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12929-024-01033-6

Trevethan, R. 2017. Sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values: Foundations, pliabilities, and pitfalls in research and practice. Frontiers in Public Health, 5, 307. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2017.00307

World Health Organization. 2024. Measures for the control of Campylobacter spp. in chicken meat: Meeting report. World Health Organization.




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.52155/ijpsat.v59.2.8786

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2026 Anwar Rosyidi

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.