Journal of virological methods · 2019
Clinical evaluation of multiplex RT-PCR assays for the detection of influenza A/B and respiratory syncytial virus using a high throughput system.
Оценочное исследованиеСтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Eigner Ulrich, Reucher Svenja, Hefner Nadine, Staffa-Peichl Sandrine, Kolb Melissa, Betz Ulrike, Holfelder Martin, Spier Gene, Pfefferle Susanne, Lütgehetmann Marc
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Lower respiratory tract infections are a major threat to public health systems worldwide, with RSV and influenza being the main agents causing hospitalization. In outbreak situations, high-volume respiratory testing is needed. In this study, we evaluated the analytical and clinical performance of a pre-designed primer/probe set for the simultaneous multiplex detection of both viruses on a high-throughput platform, the cobas® 6800, using the "open channel" of the system for integration of lab-developed assays for the detection of influenza and RSV.
RESULTS: Using the influenza/RSV qPCR Assay with swabs, LoD (95%) in TCID50/mL for influenza-A was 0.009, influenza-B 0.003, RSV-A 0.202, and RSV-B 0.009. Inter-run variability (3xLoD) was low (<1 Ct for all targets). Of 371 clinical respiratory specimens analyzed, results were concordant for 358 samples. The calculated sensitivity and specificity of the assay were 98.3% and 98.4% for Flu-A, 100% and 98.5% for Flu-B, and 98.6% and 99.7% for RSV. All quality assessment panel specimens (N = 63, including avian influenza strains) were correctly identified. None of the tested microorganisms showed cross-reactivity.
CONCLUSION: Compared with CE-IVD assays, the assay evaluated here showed good analytical and clinical sensitivity and specificity with broad coverage of different virus strains. It offers high-throughput capacity with low hands-on time, facilitating the laboratory management of large respiratory outbreaks.
RESULTS: Using the influenza/RSV qPCR Assay with swabs, LoD (95%) in TCID50/mL for influenza-A was 0.009, influenza-B 0.003, RSV-A 0.202, and RSV-B 0.009. Inter-run variability (3xLoD) was low (<1 Ct for all targets). Of 371 clinical respiratory specimens analyzed, results were concordant for 358 samples. The calculated sensitivity and specificity of the assay were 98.3% and 98.4% for Flu-A, 100% and 98.5% for Flu-B, and 98.6% and 99.7% for RSV. All quality assessment panel specimens (N = 63, including avian influenza strains) were correctly identified. None of the tested microorganisms showed cross-reactivity.
CONCLUSION: Compared with CE-IVD assays, the assay evaluated here showed good analytical and clinical sensitivity and specificity with broad coverage of different virus strains. It offers high-throughput capacity with low hands-on time, facilitating the laboratory management of large respiratory outbreaks.