Next Article in Journal
Foot-and-Mouth Disease Virus 3A Hijacks Sar1 and Sec12 for ER Remodeling in a COPII-Independent Manner
Next Article in Special Issue
Comparative Proteomic Analysis Reveals Mx1 Inhibits Senecavirus A Replication in PK-15 Cells by Interacting with the Capsid Proteins VP1, VP2 and VP3
Previous Article in Journal
Identification of Transcription Factors Regulating SARS-CoV-2 Tropism Factor Expression by Inferring Cell-Type-Specific Transcriptional Regulatory Networks in Human Lungs
Previous Article in Special Issue
Detection of Four Porcine Enteric Coronaviruses Using CRISPR-Cas12a Combined with Multiplex Reverse Transcriptase Loop-Mediated Isothermal Amplification Assay
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Comment

Comment on Wang et al. Development of a Novel Double Antibody Sandwich ELISA for Quantitative Detection of Porcine Deltacoronavirus Antigen. Viruses 2021, 13, 2403

1
College of Computer and Control Engineering, Qiqihar University, Qiqihar 161006, China
2
Heilongjiang Provincial Key Laboratory of Resistance Gene Engineering and Protection of Biodiversity in Cold Areas, College of Life Science and Agriculture and Forestry, Qiqihar University, Qiqihar 161006, China
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Viruses 2022, 14(4), 838; https://doi.org/10.3390/v14040838
Submission received: 9 March 2022 / Revised: 9 April 2022 / Accepted: 12 April 2022 / Published: 18 April 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue State-of-the-Art Porcine Virus Research in China)
We were interested in reading an article published by Wang et al. [1] in Viruses on 30 November 2021. The authors developed a double-antibody sandwich enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (DAS-ELISA) for porcine deltacoronavirus (PDCoV) detection using a monoclonal antibody against the PDCoV N protein and an anti-PDCoV rabbit polyclonal antibody. They used kappa analysis to determine the consistency between the DAS-ELISA and reverse transcriptase real-time PCR (RT-qPCR). The kappa value obtained was 0.827, indicating an almost perfect agreement between the two methods.
Although this article has provided valuable information, some substantial points that may cause misinterpretation of the results need to be clarified. Kappa analysis includes Cohen’s and Fleiss’ kappa analyses. Generally, Cohen’s and Fleiss’ kappa analyses are used to analyze intra- and inter-rater agreements, respectively [2]. Cohen’s kappa analysis is suitable for evaluating two raters, whereas Fleiss’ kappa analysis is suitable for evaluating more than two raters. In Cohen’s kappa analysis, the weighted kappa should be used to calculate the agreement in the presence of more than two categories [3]. According to this article, Cohen’s kappa was applicable based on this situation. Cohen’s kappa was calculated as follows:
k = i = 1 n ( p i i p i q i ) 1 i = 1 n p i q i
The value of p and q are the sample frequency.
The authors compared the two detection methods using two types of clinical samples, namely, 205 fecal and 59 intestinal samples. Unlike the authors, we calculated the agreement between the RT-qPCR and DAS-ELISA by using the two types of samples with SPSS 18 statistical package (SPSS 18 Inc., Chicago, IL, USA) software. The kappa values in the fecal and intestinal samples were 0.807 and 0.645, respectively. Furthermore, a simple sum of the data was performed, and the kappa value obtained was 0.781 (Table 1). The three kappa values were significantly different from the authors’ kappa value of 0.827. We would be grateful if the authors could explain their results in detail and clarify the misunderstanding.
Considering the applicability of Cohen’s kappa analysis, we suggest that the kappa values should be calculated in the presence of two or more types of samples. In our opinion, any agreed conclusions must be supported by methodological and statistical methods. We emphasize the importance of rigor and using the correct statistical approach in any scientific publication. Otherwise, misinterpretation cannot be avoided.

Author Contributions

M.L. wrote the manuscript. C.Z. helped to draft the manuscript. C.Z. and T.Y. conducted data analysis. T.Y. contributed essential ideas and revised the manuscript. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Wang, W.; Li, J.; Fan, B.; Zhang, X.; Guo, R.; Zhao, Y.; Zhou, J.; Zhou, J.; Sun, D.; Li, B. Development of a Novel Double Antibody Sandwich ELISA for Quantitative Detection of Porcine Deltacoronavirus Antigen. Viruses 2021, 13, 2403. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Meseguer-Henarejos, A.B.; Sánchez-Meca, J.; López-Pina, J.A.; Carles-Hernández, R. Inter- and intra-rater reliability of the Modified Ashworth Scale: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur. J. Phys. Rehabil. Med. 2018, 54, 576–590. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Tran, Q.D.; Demirhan, H.; Dolgun, A. Bayesian approaches to the weighted kappa-like inter-rater agreement measures. Stat. Methods Med. Res. 2021, 30, 2329–2351. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Table 1. The kappa values for calculating agreement between RT-qPCR and DAS-ELISA.
Table 1. The kappa values for calculating agreement between RT-qPCR and DAS-ELISA.
DAS-ELISA
RT-qPCRFecalPositiveNegativeTotal
Positive731487
Negative5113118
K = 0.808Total78127205
IntestinalPositiveNegativeTotal
Positive11617
Negative24042
K = 0.645Total134659
Fecal and IntestinalPositiveNegativeTotal
Positive84 (73 + 11)20 (14 + 6)104
Negative7 (5 + 2)153 (113 + 40)160
K = 0.781
(K* = 0.827)
Total91173264
Note: The table has been cited from the article published by Wang et al. [1] and undergone moderate modification. K* in the table is the kappa value calculated by Wang et al. [1].
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Li, M.; Zhang, C.; Yu, T. Comment on Wang et al. Development of a Novel Double Antibody Sandwich ELISA for Quantitative Detection of Porcine Deltacoronavirus Antigen. Viruses 2021, 13, 2403. Viruses 2022, 14, 838. https://doi.org/10.3390/v14040838

AMA Style

Li M, Zhang C, Yu T. Comment on Wang et al. Development of a Novel Double Antibody Sandwich ELISA for Quantitative Detection of Porcine Deltacoronavirus Antigen. Viruses 2021, 13, 2403. Viruses. 2022; 14(4):838. https://doi.org/10.3390/v14040838

Chicago/Turabian Style

Li, Ming, Chi Zhang, and Tianfei Yu. 2022. "Comment on Wang et al. Development of a Novel Double Antibody Sandwich ELISA for Quantitative Detection of Porcine Deltacoronavirus Antigen. Viruses 2021, 13, 2403" Viruses 14, no. 4: 838. https://doi.org/10.3390/v14040838

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop