Validation of a multi-analyte immunoassay for distinguishing bacterial vs. viral infections in a pediatric cohort

Abstract

BackgroundClinical presentation of viral and bacterial infections or co-infections overlaps significantly. Pathogen identification is the gold standard for appropriate treatment. Recently, FDA cleared a multivariate index test called MeMed-BV that distinguishes viral and bacterial infections based on the differential expression of 3 host proteins. Here, we sought to validate MeMed-BV immunoassay on MeMed Key analyzer in our pediatric hospital following guidelines from the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. MethodsThe analytical performance of the MeMed-BV test was evaluated with precision (intra- and inter-assay), method comparison and interference studies. The clinical performance (diagnostic sensitivity and specificity) of the MeMed-BV test was assessed by conducting a retrospective cohort study (n = 60) using plasma samples from pediatric patients with acute febrile illness who visited the emergency department of our hospital. ResultsMeMed-BV showed acceptable intra- and inter-assay precision with a range of < 3 score units in both the high-score bacterial as well as the low-score viral controls. Diagnostic accuracy studies revealed a sensitivity of 94% and specificity of 88% for identifying bacterial infections or co-infections. Our MeMed-BV results showed an excellent agreement (R = 0.998) with manufacturer’s laboratory data and compared well with ELISA studies. Gross hemolysis and icterus did not affect the assay, but gross lipemia showed a considerable bias in samples with moderate likelihood of viral infection. Importantly, the MeMed-BV test performed better than routinely measured infection-related biomarkers like white blood cell counts, procalcitonin and C-reactive protein in classifying bacterial infections. ConclusionMeMed-BV immunoassay demonstrated acceptable analytical performance and is reliable for distinguishing viral and bacterial infections or co-infections in pediatric patients. Future studies are warranted to examine the clinical utility, especially with respect to reducing the need for blood cultures and time to treatment for the patient.