Kawanishi N, Kinoshita Y, Reedy SE, Garvey M, Kamb. A comparative evaluation of seven commercial human influenza virus antigen detection kits for the diagnosis of equine influenza. Equine Vet J. 2025 Mar 24
Background: Equine influenza virus (EIV) is one of the most important pathogens causing respiratory signs in equids. Rapid antigen detection (RAD) kits are useful for point-of-care testing because they are user-friendly and provide fast results. Although sensitive and broad-reactive RAD kits are needed for controlling horse movement, no RAD kits specified for EIV are available.
Objective: This study evaluated the usefulness of seven RAD kits originally developed for human influenza and available in Japan during 2023-2024 for EIV antigen detection.
Study design: Experimental assay comparison.
Methods: The detection limits of each RAD kit were determined using five-fold serial dilutions of two H3N8 EIV strains. According to the results of the detection limits, the three most sensitive RAD kits (Quick Chaser Auto Flu A, B, Finevision Influenza, and RapidTesta Flu·NEXT) were further evaluated using nasopharyngeal swabs of horses experimentally infected with EIV.
Results: With reverse-transcription quantitative polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR) as a reference assay, the sensitivities of Quick Chaser Auto Flu A, B, RapidTesta Flu·NEXT, and Finevision Influenza were 63%, 61%, and 54%, respectively.
Main limitation: Samples from naturally infected horses were not tested.
Conclusions: Since the sensitivities for detecting EIV antigens vary, choosing the appropriate RAD kits is essential. Although RAD kits are less sensitive than RT-qPCR, RAD kits are useful for detecting EIV antigens as ancillary diagnostic tools in the field.
Objective: This study evaluated the usefulness of seven RAD kits originally developed for human influenza and available in Japan during 2023-2024 for EIV antigen detection.
Study design: Experimental assay comparison.
Methods: The detection limits of each RAD kit were determined using five-fold serial dilutions of two H3N8 EIV strains. According to the results of the detection limits, the three most sensitive RAD kits (Quick Chaser Auto Flu A, B, Finevision Influenza, and RapidTesta Flu·NEXT) were further evaluated using nasopharyngeal swabs of horses experimentally infected with EIV.
Results: With reverse-transcription quantitative polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR) as a reference assay, the sensitivities of Quick Chaser Auto Flu A, B, RapidTesta Flu·NEXT, and Finevision Influenza were 63%, 61%, and 54%, respectively.
Main limitation: Samples from naturally infected horses were not tested.
Conclusions: Since the sensitivities for detecting EIV antigens vary, choosing the appropriate RAD kits is essential. Although RAD kits are less sensitive than RT-qPCR, RAD kits are useful for detecting EIV antigens as ancillary diagnostic tools in the field.
See Also:
Latest articles in those days:
- Modeling Airborne Influenza in Three Dimensions 2 days ago
- Increased contact transmission of contemporary Human H5N1 compared to Bovine and Mountain Lion H5N1 in a hamster model 2 days ago
- Immunity to hemagglutinin and neuraminidase results in additive reductions in airborne transmission of influenza H1N1 virus in ferrets 2 days ago
- A modelling exploration of potential spatiotemporal risk of high pathogenicity avian influenza virus introduction to Danish dairy herds through the contaminated environment 2 days ago
- Emergence of a novel H4N6 avian influenza virus with mammalian adaptation isolated from migratory birds in Zhejiang Province, China, 2024 2 days ago
[Go Top] [Close Window]


