# Breeder doesn't test for SA or Addison--Red flag?



## Califoregon (Jul 30, 2015)

We have been talking to a couple of breeders about upcoming litters and the trend seems to be to not test for SA or Addisons. They both say that the tests are just if the dog has the disease at that exact moment and doesn't mean they are a carrier or not, nor if the pups could get it or not. 

Also they don't test for neonatal (because we aren't planning to breed) and Vonwillerbrands because the parents are cleared. 



Are these test necessary when looking for a puppy or overkill and unreliable? 

Thoughts? Should we still continue to pursue getting a puppy from them?

Thank you!


----------



## peppersb (Jun 5, 2011)

Addison's and SA are two of the most important health risks for any standard poodle. But despite a lot of research by scientists at UC Davis and elsewhere, there is no genetic test for these diseases. As the breeders have told you, the available tests show only if the parent dogs have the disease at the moment that they are tested. They do not assure you that the dog that is tested will not get the disease later, and they certainly do not assure you that your pup will not get the disease. ANY standard poodle is at risk for these diseases. I agree with the breeders who have told you that they do not test for these diseases. 

In contrast, von Willebrand's and neonatal encephalitis are caused by a single recessive gene that has been identified. There is a DNA test that can reliably identify which dogs are affected, carriers or clear. If one parent is tested as clear (i.e., not affected and not a carrier), then the offspring will not get the disease. I believe that OFA will list a dog as clear by parentage only if both parents have been tested (they will not look back to grandparents, etc.). I think that is a good standard. It is a relatively cheap test and I would want to see test results listed on OFA (Orthopedic Foundation for Animals) as clear for either one parent or for both of a parent dog's parents. Verifying that status of one parent is good enough if you are not going to breed your puppy. 

Testing for neonatal encephalitis is less important for you as a puppy buyer because puppies with this disease die shortly after birth so there is no chance that you would end up with one. But I still think the breeder would be foolish not to have the test done (or verify the clear by parentage status).

The parent dogs should also be tested for hips, eyes, thyroid and cardiac with results listed on OFA (or certificates available for your inspection).


----------



## ArreauStandardPoodle (Sep 1, 2009)

Ditto what Peppersb s aid. These two tests are a snapshot in time and do not in any way let you know anything other than the dog did or did not have the diseases at the time of the testing. It generally takes three weeks to get the SA results, and I have heard of dogs tests coming back clear, and in the interim they have come down with a full blown case. Breeders will be thrilled when they have a conclusive DNA test


----------



## CharismaticMillie (Jun 16, 2010)

Not testing for SA is problematic to me as while it's only a snapshot in time, it can (and does!) prove to be a valuable tool if a dog ends up having subclinical SA meaning that they have the disease with no symptoms. I would not purchase a puppy if both parents has not had SA testing done nor will I breed to a dog without a normal SA skin punch result. Addisons testing, however, is not generally done as a pre-breeding screen.

Ask to see the clear NE and vWD test results for the parents to the breeding pair to verify clear by parentage status and you're set on that.


----------



## gr8pdls (Jul 13, 2010)

Using diagnostic tests to predict the future just doesn't make sense to me. A better approach is to do a thorough pedigree analysis by contacting related dogs' owners and asking if they know of any health issues with relatives of the parents and kin. Diseases tend to run along familial lines.

SA skin punches are especially intrusive and there are a lot of false positives and just plain mistakes in reading the samples.


----------



## CharismaticMillie (Jun 16, 2010)

To my knowledge, there is no such thing as a false positive SA test result. You can end up with an equivocal result and need to retest, but a positive, affected result means the dog has SA - end of story. False negatives can occur which, combined with the fact that it is only a test of phenotype at that moment, obviously makes SA more difficult to breed away from than the diseases for which we have genetic DNA tests.

It's obviously a topic of debate among breeders. I personally choose to err on the side of caution (or what I consider to be erring on the side of caution) and have the test done at least once on all breeding dogs and to only breed to dogs with at least one normal result and of course, to combine this with careful pedigree analysis as gr8pdls mentions. I think it's important to remember that the test only provides a very small piece of the puzzle, but personally I consider that piece to be important.


----------



## gr8pdls (Jul 13, 2010)

If, as the OFA website says "the current screening method may result in false negatives", why wouldn't the reverse be true? It wasn't too long ago that a California Poodle was supposedly sub-clinically affected but a later retest showed normal. But, a false negative seems more catastrophic as the dog would actually have SA and possibly be used for breeding. 

The "age of onset varies" with SA. If a Poodle tested normal at age two, it could very well develop SA at age 6. That's why OFA recommends SA testing every year of a breeding dog. 

So, the SA test can result in false negatives, sub-clinical, and equivocal doesn't give me much confidence in its reliability. Along with the two or three 1/4" skin punches in the neck area, the current test just doesn't provide enough information worth the pain.

Since SA is an auto-immune disease, hopefully all breeders will be using the new UC-Davis VGL Poodle DNA genetic diversity test that measures the diversity of DLA I and DLA II. That's a region of genetic code involved with immune related health. For more info VGL UC-Davis Genetic Diversity in Standard Poodle.


----------



## patk (Jun 13, 2013)

most interesting thread i have read at pf in a long time on a critical issue. i wish it could be made a sticky to help people understand what is involved and so that breeders will come back and update the thread - esp as the studies being done at davis evolve. actually, maybe someone will convince the mods to post the link to the davis study as a sticky along with this thread.


----------



## lily cd re (Jul 23, 2012)

Any kind of diagnostic test is based on having two attributes. One is specificity. In other words is a positive test really a clear indicator the particular disease and nothing else. The second important attribute to a diagnostic test is its sensitivity. In other words will it detect the disease at low levels of activity (for instance sub-clinical SA).

All tests have to balance sensitivity and specificity. If a test is very sensitive it becomes somewhat more likely that there may be false positives. If a test is highly specific it tends to mean that there may be false negatives. Not being closely familiar with the tests being discussed here I can't say too much about them in particular, but thought I would give a little background for understanding why false results may occur.

I agree with patk that this is an interesting and important discussion. I thank those who are breeders who have thoughtfully contributed.


----------



## CharismaticMillie (Jun 16, 2010)

gr8pdls said:


> If, as the OFA website says "the current screening method may result in false negatives", why wouldn't the reverse be true? It wasn't too long ago that a California Poodle was supposedly sub-clinically affected but a later retest showed normal. But, a false negative seems more catastrophic as the dog would actually have SA and possibly be used for breeding.
> 
> The "age of onset varies" with SA. If a Poodle tested normal at age two, it could very well develop SA at age 6. That's why OFA recommends SA testing every year of a breeding dog.
> 
> ...


A false negative is possible because a dog may have sebaceous adenitis, but since the sample biopsied is only from one small area on the dog, it is very possible for this sample to come from an area of the body that is not symptomatic or affected. On the other hand, if a test comes back as being affected, that dog is affected. No questions asked. The California dog who tested positive for sebaceous adenitis and then was retested with a negative result was denied by OFA a request to have affected status changed to normal. The reasoning for this was that a false positive is impossible but a false negative is possible. This is due to the high specificity of the test as explained by Lily cd re. 

I agree with you, gr8pdls, the potential for a false negative result is a huge issue and I second you on the importance of VGL testing.


----------



## ArreauStandardPoodle (Sep 1, 2009)

AMEN to the VGL testing. This is by far the closest we have come to getting somewhere with this disease and hopefully ever closer to a DNA test to determine who is or is not a carrier, and the knowledge of whether or not it is genetic at all.


----------



## CharismaticMillie (Jun 16, 2010)

One more thing - to clarify for those who aren't familiar with the tests, results can come back as normal, equivocal, subclinical or affected. A normal result means that no SA is seen in that area at that time. An equivocal result means that there is inflammation, but it can not be determined for certain whether it is SA or something else causing irritation or inflammation. A subclinical or affected result means that there is definite SA in that spot at that time. People are often advised to avoid excessive grooming prior to an SA test as it can lead to inflammation and an equivocal result. If you get an equivocal result, you have to retest in 6 months. However, nothing can lead to a positive subclinical or affected result except for SA.


----------



## DavidT (Apr 15, 2010)

Just for further afifrmation on this subject, our male Standard Poodle developed SA at about 18 months of age. Previous to that, he had a most glorious and proper coat. His father, a multi show winning champion was thoroughly tested for everything, as was his mother. His father also developed SA at 6 years of age and breeding discontinued. One of our dogs siblings also turned up with SA. So it seems like, at least right now, its kind of a "roll of the dice" for consciencious breeders until more is known about the disease. I know studies are being done at UC Davis. Hopefully constructive answers are forthcoming.

DavidT


----------

