Laboratory-developed Real-time PCR Research Articles

Performance evaluation of the quantitative assay Adenovirus ELITe MGB® Kit on EDTA-plasma, using the ELITe BeGenius® system

BackgroundAdenovirus infections constitute an important cause of morbidity and mortality after hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Detection and monitoring of adenovirus in EDTA-plasma by real-time quantitative PCR is a sensitive tool for identification and management of patients at risk of a potentially fatal infection. ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to evaluate the analytical and clinical performance of the quantitative Adenovirus ELITe MGB® Kit (ELITechGroup S.p.A.) using the ELITe BeGenius® (ELITechGroup S.p.A.) system and compare the assay to a laboratory-developed quantitative real-time PCR assay. Study designAnalytical sensitivity of the Adenovirus ELITe MGB® Kit was determined by testing serial dilutions of the WHO standard. Detection of adenovirus serotypes was assessed using a panel of 51 serotypes. Clinical sensitivity and specificity were determined by comparing the Adenovirus ELITe MGB® Kit results with the laboratory-developed assay results of 155 retrospective and prospective EDTA-plasma samples from transplant recipients. ResultsThe analytical sensitivity of the Adenovirus ELITe MGB® Kit was at least 54 (1.7 Log) IU/mL and the quantitative results showed a high correlation with the WHO standard (R2 = 0.9978; Pearson) within the range of 1.7 to 6.6 Log IU/mL. All 51 adenovirus serotypes were detected. The clinical specificity and sensitivity for EDTA plasma of the Adenovirus ELITe MGB® Kit were 97.4 % and 99.1 % respectively. ConclusionThe Adenovirus ELITe MGB® Kit performed on the ELITe BeGenius® system is a highly sensitive and specific assay for the detection of adenovirus in EDTA-plasma from transplantation patients.

A multicenter evaluation of the QIAstat-Dx meningitis-encephalitis syndromic test kit as compared to the conventional diagnostic microbiology workflow

PurposeRapid diagnosis and treatment of infectious meningitis and encephalitis (ME) is critical to minimize morbidity and mortality. Recently, Qiagen introduced the CE-IVD QIAstat-Dx ME panel (QS-ME) for syndromic diagnostic testing of meningitis and encephalitis. Some data on the performance of the QS-ME in comparison to the BioFire FilmArray ME panel are available. In this study, the performance of the QS-ME is compared to the current diagnostic workflow in two academic medical centers in the Netherlands.MethodsA total of 110 cerebrospinal fluid samples were retrospectively tested with the QS-ME. The results obtained were compared to the results of laboratory-developed real-time PCR assays (LDTs), IS-pro, bacterial culture, and cryptococcal antigen (CrAg) testing. In addition, the accuracy of the QS-ME was also investigated using an external quality assessment (EQA) panel consisting of ten samples.ResultsFour of the 110 samples tested failed to produce a valid QS-ME result. In the remaining 106 samples, the QS-ME detected 53/53 viral targets, 38/40 bacterial targets, and 7/13 Cryptococcus neoformans targets. The discrepant bacterial results consisted of two samples that were previously tested positive for Listeria monocytogenes (CT 35.8) and Streptococcus pneumoniae (CT 40), respectively. The QS-ME detected one additional result, consisting of a varicella-zoster virus signal (CT 35.9), in a sample in which both techniques detected Streptococcus pyogenes. Finally, 100% concordance was achieved in testing a blinded bacterial ME EQA panel.ConclusionThe QS-ME is a relevant addition to the syndromic testing landscape to assist in diagnosing infectious ME.

Evaluation of a Zoonotic Orthopoxvirus PCR Assay for the Detection of Mpox Virus Infection

An epidemic caused by an outbreak of monkeypox (mpox) in May 2022 rapidly spread internationally, requiring an urgent response from the clinical diagnostics community. A detailed description of the clinical validation and implementation of a laboratory-developed real-time PCR test for detecting nonvariola Orthopoxvirus-specific DNA based on the newly designed RealStar Zoonotic Orthopoxvirus assay is presented. The validation was performed using an accuracy panel (n=97) comprising skin lesion swabs in universal transport media and from mpox virus genomic DNA spiked into pooled mpox virus-negative remnant universal transport media of lesion specimens submitted for routine clinical testing in the NewYork-Presbyterian Hospital clinical laboratory system. Accuracy testing demonstrated excellent assay agreement between expected and observed values and comparable diagnostic performance to three different reference tests. Analytical sensitivity with 95% detection probability was 126 copies/mL, and analytical specificity, clinical sensitivity, and clinical specificity were 100%. In summary, the RealStar Zoonotic Orthopoxvirus assay provides a sensitive and reliable method for routine diagnosis of mpox infections.

Evaluation of the BioFire® COVID-19 test and Respiratory Panel 2.1 for rapid identification of SARS-CoV-2 in nasopharyngeal swab samples

The BioFire® COVID-19 Test and Respiratory Panel 2.1 (RP2.1) are rapid, fully automated assays for the detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in nasopharyngeal swabs. In the case of the RP2.1, an additional 21 viral and bacterial pathogens can be detected. Both tests have received emergency use authorization from the U.S. Food & Drug Administration and Interim Order authorization from Health Canada for use in clinical laboratories. We evaluated the performance characteristics of these tests in comparison to a laboratory-developed real-time PCR assay targeting the viral RNA-dependent RNA polymerase and E genes. A total of 78 tests were performed using the BioFire COVID-19 Test, including 30 clinical specimens and 48 tests in a limit of detection study; 57 tests were performed using the RP2.1 for evaluation of SARS-CoV-2 detection, including 30 clinical specimens and 27 tests for limit of detection. Results showed 100% concordance between the BioFire assays and the laboratory-developed test for all clinical samples tested, and acceptable performance of both BioFire assays at their stated limits of detection. Conclusively, the BioFire COVID-19 Test and RP2.1 are highly sensitive assays that can be effectively used in the clinical laboratory for rapid SARS-CoV-2 testing.

Performance evaluation of the Panther Fusion® respiratory tract panel

BackgroundRespiratory tract infections are among the most common infections during winter season. Rapid diagnostics is required for clinical decision making regarding isolation of patients and appropriate therapy. ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to evaluate the analytical and clinical performance characteristics of the Panther Fusion® respiratory panel using published laboratory-developed real-time PCR assays (LDT). Study designAnalytical sensitivity of Panther Fusion® Flu A/B/RSV was assessed by testing dilutions of cell culture isolates. Clinical performance assessment included the complete Panther Fusion® respiratory panel (Flu-A/B/RSV, PIV 1-4 and AdV/hMPV/RV) and consisted of a retrospective and a prospective study-arm. The retrospective evaluation included 201, stored (−80 °C) samples collected between February 2006 and January 2017. Prospective evaluation was performed on 1045 unselected pretreated respiratory tract samples from patients presented to our hospital between November 2017 and May 2018. ResultsAnalytical sensitivity was generally slightly lower for the Panther Fusion® assays. Clinical specificity and sensitivity was between 96 %–100 % and 71.9 %–100 %, respectively. Discrepant results were found in 146 samples of which 88 samples tested LDT positive / Panther Fusion® negative and 58 samples were LDT negative / Panther Fusion® positive. A total of ten discrepant samples with Ct-values <30 were sequenced to confirm the presence of 7 RV-C not-detected by LDT and 1 RV-A and 2 ADV-2 not detected by Panther Fusion®. ConclusionsThe Panther Fusion® provides a random-access system with continuous loading and much shorter sample-to-answer times compared to LDT, albeit with a slightly less clinical sensitivity compared to the LDT.

Comparison of the Cepheid Xpert Xpress Flu/RSV assay and commercial real-time PCR for the detection of influenza A and influenza B in a prospective cohort from China

BackgroundThe Xpert Xpress Flu/RSV assay is released by FDA for rapid detection of influenza A (FluA), influenza B (FluB), and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV). This study aimed to evaluate its clinical performance in comparison to that of the RT-PCR assay cleared by China FDA (CFDA-PCR). MethodsNasopharyngeal specimens were collected from patients and tested by the two assays side by side. Discordant results were tested with a laboratory-developed real-time PCR for resolution. Viral load in the sample was quantified with a droplet digital PCR. ResultsA total of 658 specimens were involved and gave 94.7%–99.1% agreement between the two assays. The Xpert assay showed higher sensitivity for FluA (100% vs. 89.8%) and FluB detection (100% vs. 95.3%), and also higher accuracy (98.9% vs. 95.7%) for FluA than the CDFA-PCR. The positive and negative predictive values (NPV) for the three viruses ranged from 90.5% to 100% in the two assays, with higher NPV for FluA and FluB in Xpert assay. Moreover, the Xpert Ct values showed a linear correlation with virus titer in specimens tested. ConclusionOverall, the Xpert assay is a reliable and sensitive tool for the detection of FluA, FluB and RSV in our clinical settings.

Validation of a novel molecular diagnostic panel for pediatric musculoskeletal infections: Integration of the Cepheid Xpert MRSA/SA SSTI and laboratory-developed real-time PCR assays for clindamycin resistance genes and Kingella kingae detection

BackgroundPathogen detection in pediatric patients with musculoskeletal infections relies on conventional bacterial culture, which is slow and can delay antimicrobial optimization. The ability to rapidly identify causative agents and antimicrobial resistance genes in these infections may improve clinical care. MethodsConvenience specimens from bone and joint samples submitted for culture to Children's Hospital Colorado (CHCO) from June 2012 to October 2016 were evaluated using a “Musculoskeletal Diagnostic Panel” (MDP) consisting of the Xpert MRSA/SA SSTI real-time PCR (qPCR, Cepheid) and laboratory-developed qPCRs for Kingella kingae detection and erm genes A, B, and C which confer clindamycin resistance. Results from the MDP were compared to culture and antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST) results. ResultsA total of 184 source specimens from 125 patients were tested. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) of the Xpert MRSA/SA SSTI compared to culture and AST results were 85%, 98%, 93%, and 95% respectively for MSSA and 82%, 100%, 100%, and 99% for MRSA. Compared to phenotypic clindamycin resistance in S. aureus isolates, the erm A, B, and C gene PCRs collectively demonstrated a sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV of 80%, 96%, 67%, and 98%. In comparison to clinical truth, Kingella PCR had a sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV of 100%, 99.5%, 100%, and 100%. ConclusionsThis novel MDP offers a rapid, sensitive, and specific option for pathogen detection in pediatric patients with musculoskeletal infections.

Comparative evaluation of a laboratory-developed real-time PCR assay and RealStar\xae Adenovirus PCR Kit for quantitative detection of human adenovirus

BackgroundHuman adenoviruses are common causes of community-acquired respiratory tract and enteric infections. Severe disseminated infections with high mortality rates may be seen in immunocompromised individuals. An accurate and cost-effective quantitative assay is essential not only for laboratory diagnosis of adenoviral infections, but also for monitoring of response to antiviral treatment. The diagnostic performance of an in-house quantitative polymerase chain reaction assay was compared to a commercial system.MethodsThe analytical sensitivity, specificity, linearity, precision and accuracy of an in-house adenovirus quantitative polymerase chain reaction assay were evaluated against the RealStar® Adenovirus PCR Kit (Altona Diagnostics GmbH, Hamburg, Germany), using 122 clinical specimens and 18 proficiency testing samples.ResultsLinear regression analysis of the quantitative results by the in-house assay showed the dynamic range from 2.60 to 9 log10 (plasma) and 2.94 to 9 log10 (viral transport medium) copies/mL, with the coefficient of determination (R2) of 0.996 and 0.998, respectively. A dilution series demonstrated the limits of detection and lower limits of quantification for plasma were 2.06 log10 and 2.60 log10 copies/mL and those for viral transport medium were 2.31 log10 and 2.94 log10 copies/mL respectively. The precision of the in-house assay was highly reproducible among runs with coefficients of variance ranging from 0.07 to 3.21% for plasma and 0.17% to 2.11% for viral transport medium. A comparison of 52 matched samples showed an excellent correlation between the quantitative viral loads measured by the in-house assay and the RealStar® Adenovirus PCR Kit (R2 = 0.984), with an average bias of − 0.16 log10 copies/mL.ConclusionsThe in-house adenovirus assay is a sensitive and reliable assay with lower cost for the detection and quantification of adenoviral DNA when compared to the RealStar® Adenovirus PCR Kit.

Clinical and analytical evaluation of the new Aptima Mycoplasma genitalium assay, with data on M. genitalium prevalence and antimicrobial resistance in M. genitalium in Denmark, Norway and Sweden in 2016

ObjectivesMycoplasma genitalium (MG) causes urethritis and cervicitis, potentially causing reproductive complications. Resistance in MG to first-line (azithromycin) and second-line (moxifloxacin) treatment has increased. We examined the clinical and analytical performance of the new Conformité Européene (CE)/in vitro diagnostics (IVD) Aptima Mycoplasma genitalium assay (CE/IVD AMG; Hologic); the prevalence of MG, Chlamydia trachomatis (CT) and Neisseria gonorrhoeae (NG); and MG resistance to azithromycin and moxifloxacin in Denmark, Norway and Sweden in 2016. MethodsFrom February 2016 to February 2017, urogenital and extragenital (only in Denmark) specimens from consecutive attendees at three sexually transmitted disease clinics were tested with the CE/IVD AMG, the research-use-only MG Alt TMA-1 assay (Hologic), Aptima Combo 2 (CT/NG) assay and a laboratory-developed TaqMan real-time mgpB quantitative real-time PCR (qPCR). Resistance-associated mutations were determined by sequencing. Strains of MG and other mycoplasma species in different concentrations were also tested. ResultsIn total 5269 patients were included. The prevalence of MG was 7.2% (382/5269; 4.9–9.8% in the countries). The sensitivity of the CE/IVD AMG, MG Alt TMA-1 and mgpB qPCR ranged 99.13–100%, 99.13–100% and 73.24–81.60%, respectively, in the countries. The specificity ranged 99.57–99.96%, 100% and 99.69–100%, respectively. The prevalence of resistance-associated mutations for azithromycin and moxifloxacin was 41.4% (120/290; 17.7–56.6%) and 6.6% (18/274; 4.1–10.2%), respectively. Multidrug resistance was found in all countries (2.7%; 1.1–4.2%). ConclusionsBoth transcription-mediated amplification (TMA)-based MG assays had a highly superior sensitivity compared to the mgpB qPCR. The prevalence of MG and azithromycin resistance was high. Validated and quality-assured molecular tests for MG, routine resistance testing of MG-positive samples and antimicrobial resistance surveillance are crucial.

Evaluation of a real-time PCR assay for the qualitative detection of Clostridium difficile toxin gene and its clinical application

Objective In comparison of the performances for the detection of Clostridium difficile toxin B genes from stool between BD MAX Cdiff assay and a laboratory-developed (LD) assay.The LD assay was evaluated in clinical application. Methods This study was a clinical application research. A total of 147 stool specimens from patients with diarrhea in Hangzhou First Hospital affiliated with Zhejiang Chinese Medical University were detected by the two assays from 1 July to 30 September 2014. DNA extraction and amplification of the tcdB gene were performed automatically on the BD MAX platform. Meanwhile, the tcdA and tcdB gene were detected by the LD real-time PCR assay after DNA extraction. Then, the results were analyzed by use of SPSS 10.0. Results A total of 147 stool samples were collected. There were 33 C. difficile positive cases and 114 negative cases detected by both of two assays. However, there were four stool samples had incongruent results. In comparison with BD MAX, the LD assay had a sensitivity of 93.94% (31/33), a specificity of 98.25% (112/114), a positive predictive value of 93.94% (31/33), and negative predictive value 98.25% (112/114). Furthermore, the results of the LD assay were statistically coherent with that of the BD assay (Kappa=0.922, P<0.01). Conclusions The LD assay was highly sensitive and accurate as BD MAX Cdiff assay in the detection of toxigenic Clostridium difficile. Furthermore, this LD assay could be also applied to detection of clinical stool samples directly with low cost. The assay will be more promising in diagnosis of toxigenic C. difficile in clinical application in China due to no additional instrument needed.(Chin J Lab Med, 2017, 40: 511-514) Key words: Clostridium difficile; Bacterial toxins; Molecular diagnostic techniques

Comparison of ePlex Respiratory Pathogen Panel with Laboratory-Developed Real-Time PCR Assays for Detection of Respiratory Pathogens

ABSTRACTInfections of the respiratory tract can be caused by a diversity of pathogens, both viral and bacterial. Rapid microbiological diagnosis ensures appropriate antimicrobial therapy as well as effective implementation of isolation precautions. The ePlex respiratory pathogen panel (RP panel) is a novel molecular biology-based assay, developed by GenMark Diagnostics, Inc. (Carlsbad, CA), to be performed within a single cartridge for the diagnosis of 25 respiratory pathogens (viral and bacterial). The objective of this study was to compare the performance of the RP panel with those of laboratory-developed real-time PCR assays, using a variety of previously collected clinical respiratory specimens. A total of 343 clinical specimens as well as 29 external quality assessment (EQA) specimens and 2 different Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus isolates have been assessed in this study. The RP panel showed an agreement of 97.4% with the real-time PCR assay regarding 464 pathogens found in the clinical specimens. All pathogens present in clinical samples and EQA samples with a threshold cycle (CT) value of <30 were detected correctly using the RP panel. The RP panel detected 17 additional pathogens, 7 of which could be confirmed by discrepant testing. In conclusion, this study shows excellent performance of the RP panel in comparison to real-time PCR assays for the detection of respiratory pathogens. The ePlex system provided a large amount of useful diagnostic data within a short time frame, with minimal hands-on time, and can therefore potentially be used for rapid diagnostic sample-to-answer testing, in either a laboratory or a decentralized setting.

Impact of a Rapid Herpes Simplex Virus PCR Assay on Duration of Acyclovir Therapy.

Herpes simplex virus (HSV) infections of the central nervous system (CNS) are associated with significant morbidity and mortality rates in children. This study assessed the impact of a direct HSV (dHSV) PCR assay on the time to result reporting and the duration of acyclovir therapy for children with signs and symptoms of meningitis and encephalitis. A total of 363 patients with HSV PCR results from cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) samples were included in this retrospective analysis, divided into preimplementation and postimplementation groups. For the preimplementation group, CSF testing was performed using a laboratory-developed real-time PCR assay; for the postimplementation group, CSF samples were tested using a direct sample-to-answer assay. All CSF samples were negative for HSV. Over 60% of patients from both groups were prescribed acyclovir. The average HSV PCR test turnaround time for the postimplementation group was reduced by 14.5 h (23.6 h versus 9.1 h; P < 0.001). Furthermore, 79 patients (43.6%) in the postimplementation group had dHSV PCR results reported <4 h after specimen collection. The mean time from specimen collection to acyclovir discontinuation was 17.1 h shorter in the postimplementation group (31.1 h versus 14 h; P < 0.001). The median duration of acyclovir therapy was also significantly reduced in the postimplementation group (29.2 h versus 14.3 h; P = 0.01). Our investigation suggests that implementation of rapid HSV PCR testing can decrease turnaround times and the duration of unnecessary acyclovir therapy.

Comparison of the Simplexa HSV1 & 2 Direct kit and laboratory-developed real-time PCR assays for herpes simplex virus detection

BackgroundRapid detection and differentiation of herpes simplex viruses (HSV) is important for patient management and treatment, especially in HSV meningoencephalitis. ObjectivesResults of Simplexa HSV1 & 2 Direct kit (Focus Diagnostics), an FDA-cleared sample-to-result method providing results in ∼75min, were compared to those of laboratory-developed real-time PCR assays (LDT) for detection of HSV1 and HSV2. Study designSamples tested included 168 cerebral spinal fluid (CSF) collected prospectively and 150 tested retrospectively: 81 from clinical testing and 69 from subjects in a neonatal herpes study; and 53 plasma and sera. Each sample was tested by both methods on the same day. ResultsThree of 318 CSF had invalid Simplexa Direct results and negative LDT results. Three neonatal samples with low HSV viral loads by LDT could not be typed; two were HSV2 positive and one was negative by Simplexa Direct. Of 312 CSF with valid, type-specific results, HSV1 was detected in 16 by LDT and in 17 by Simplexa Direct; HSV2 was detected in 48 by LDT and in 49 by Simplexa Direct. Concordance rates were 98.4% (κ 0.84) and 97.1% (κ 0.89) for HSV1 and HSV2, respectively. Positive percent agreements were 87.5% for HSV1 and 91.7% for HSV2. Two and four CSF were positive only by LDT and three and five were positive only by Simplexa Direct for HSV1 and HSV2, respectively. ConclusionsSimplexa HSV1 & 2 assay performed well compared to an established LDT. The faster turn-around-time compared to LDT will allow for more rapid antiviral treatment and better patient management.

FilmArray® respiratory panel performance in respiratory samples from neonatal care units

FilmArray Respiratory Panel (RP) (Idaho Technology, Inc., Salt Lake City, UT, USA) performance was retrospectively evaluated in respiratory samples collected from neonates in 2 reference neonatology units. Using the FilmArray RP assay, 121/152 (79.6%) samples were positive for at least 1 respiratory virus, while 31/152 (20.4%) were negative. FilmArray RP results were concordant in 68/72 (94.4%) respiratory samples tested with laboratory-developed real-time PCR assays, while in 4/72 (5.6%) samples, the FilmArray RP assay detected an additional virus (2 human rhinovirus/enterovirus and 2 bocavirus). In addition, FilmArray RP results for 70 of 80 (87.5%) respiratory samples tested were concordant with the Seegene Seeplex RV15® detection assay (Seegene, Inc., Seoul, South Korea), while 10/80 (12.5%) were discordant. The advantages of the FilmArray RP are the rapid detection of respiratory viruses (1 hour), the wide number of pathogens detectable in a single assay, and the reduced hands-on time.

Comparison of Simplexa HSV 1 &amp; 2 PCR with Culture, Immunofluorescence, and Laboratory-Developed TaqMan PCR for Detection of Herpes Simplex Virus in Swab Specimens

The Simplexa HSV 1 & 2 direct PCR assay was compared with conventional cell culture, cytospin-enhanced direct fluorescent antibody (DFA), and a laboratory-developed real-time TaqMan PCR (LDT HSV PCR) using extracted nucleic acid for the detection of herpes simplex virus (HSV) in dermal, genital, mouth, ocular, and other swab samples. One hundred seventy-one swabs were tested prospectively, and 58 were positive for HSV (34 HSV-1 and 24 HSV-2). Cytospin-DFA detected 50 (86.2%), conventional cell culture 51 (87.9%), Simplexa direct 55 (94.8%), and LDT HSV PCR 57 (98.3%) of 58 true positives. Simplexa direct detected more positives than DFA and culture, but the differences were not significant (P = 0.0736 and P = 0.3711, respectively, by the McNemar test). Samples that were positive by all methods (n = 48) were strong positives (LDT cycle threshold [CT] value, 14.4 to 26.1). One strongly positive sample was falsely negative by LDT HSV PCR due to a failure of TaqMan probe binding. Three samples falsely negative by Simplexa direct had high CT values by LDT HSV PCR (LDT CT, 35.8 to 38.2). Omission of the DNA extraction step by Simplexa direct led to a drop in sensitivity compared to the sensitivity of LDT HSV PCR using extracted samples (94.8% versus 98.3%, respectively), but the difference was not significant (P = 0.6171). Simplexa HSV 1 & 2 direct PCR was the most expensive but required the least training of the assays used, had the lowest hands-on time and fastest assay time (75 min, versus 3 h by LDT HSV PCR), and provided the HSV type.

Simultaneous detection of Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex and nontuberculous mycobacteria in respiratory specimens

Many nontuberculous mycobacteria (NTM) species have clinical significance, and the rapid and reliable identification of Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex (MTBC) and NTM species is important. We evaluated the simultaneous detection of MTBC and NTM in respiratory specimens. MTBC and NTM were simultaneously detected and identified by laboratory-developed (LDT) real-time PCR, multiplex real-time PCR/melting curve analysis, rpoB PCR restriction fragment length polymorphisms and the AdvanSure Mycobacteria GenoBlot assay (LG Life Sciences). Eighty-five respiratory specimens from 69 patients showed simultaneous detection of MTBC and NTM. A line probe assay showed 70.6% concordance with LDT. Ten patients (14.5%) had a history of tuberculosis, and eight patients (11.6%) had been previously diagnosed with bronchiectasis. Mixed cultures were present one time in 57 patients (82.6%) and repeatedly in 12 patients (17.4%). MTBC was more frequent in 44 patients (63.8%), and NTM was isolated in seven patients (10.1%). The commonly detected NTM species in the mixed cultures were Mycobacterium intracellulare (29.0%) and Mycobacterium abscessus (29.0%). Co-isolation caused a failure of antitubercular drug susceptibility testing in 2 patients (2.9%). Molecular methods allow MTBC and NTM species to be simultaneously identified in respiratory specimens. NTM isolated with MTBC has clinical significance in some patients and should not be ignored.

Comparison of the GenMark Diagnostics eSensor Respiratory Viral Panel to Real-Time PCR for Detection of Respiratory Viruses in Children

A novel eSensor respiratory viral panel (eSensor RVP) multiplexed nucleic acid amplification test (GenMark Diagnostics, Inc., Carlsbad, CA) was compared to laboratory-developed real-time PCR assays for the detection of various respiratory viruses. A total of 250 frozen archived pediatric respiratory specimens previously characterized as either negative or positive for one or more viruses by real-time PCR were examined using the eSensor RVP. Overall agreement between the eSensor RVP and corresponding real-time PCR assays for shared analytes was 99.2% (kappa = 0.96 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 0.94 to 0.98]). The combined positive percent agreement was 95.4% (95% CI, 92.5 to 97.3); the negative percent agreement was 99.7% (95% CI, 99.4 to 99.8). The mean real-time PCR threshold cycle (C(T)) value for specimens with discordant results was 39.73 (95% CI, 38.03 to 41.43). Detection of coinfections and correct identification of influenza A virus subtypes were comparable between methods. Of note, the eSensor RVP rhinovirus assay was found to be more sensitive and specific than the corresponding rhinovirus real-time PCR. In contrast, the eSensor RVP adenovirus B, C, and E assays demonstrated some cross-reactivity when tested against known adenovirus serotypes representing groups A through F. The eSensor RVP is robust and relatively easy to perform, it involves a unique biosensor technology for target detection, and its multiplexed design allows for efficient and simultaneous interrogation of a single specimen for multiple viruses. Potential drawbacks include a slower turnaround time and the need to manipulate amplified product during the protocol, increasing the possibility of contamination.

Respiratory Virus Detection in Immunocompromised Patients with FilmArray Respiratory Panel Compared to Conventional Methods

Respiratory virus infections cause significant morbidity and mortality in immunocompromised patients. Timely diagnosis is needed to provide optimal clinical care. Diagnostic tests routinely available at most institutions are limited by poor sensitivity and a slow turnaround time. We collected 90 respiratory samples from 87 immunocompromised patients (56 bronchoalveolar lavage and 34 nasopharyngeal aspirate samples) in order to compare the performance of routine respiratory virus testing available at our institution to the FilmArray respiratory panel assay, a novel diagnostic tool which utilizes multiplex PCR to test for 21 respiratory pathogens with a 1-h turnaround time. Samples with discordant results and 13 samples with concordant results underwent further verification testing by laboratory-developed real-time PCR. The FilmArray assay identified viral pathogens in more samples than did clinical testing (30/90 versus 16/90; McNemar P = 0.001). Most of the additional viral pathogens identified by the FilmArray respiratory panel assay that were confirmed by verification testing were pathogens not assessed by routine clinical tests, including rhinovirus/enterovirus, human metapneumovirus, and coronavirus. The FilmArray respiratory panel assay allowed for increased identification of respiratory viral pathogens in this cohort of immunocompromised patients.

Routine use of duplex real-time PCR assays including a commercial internal control for molecular diagnosis of opportunistic DNA virus infections

The aim of this work was to improve the validity of laboratory-developed real-time PCR protocols implemented in the laboratory for molecular diagnosis of opportunistic DNA virus infections using the Simplexa™ extraction and amplification control (SEAC) which allows the monitoring of the whole extraction and amplification process. Herpes simplex virus (HSV), varicella-zoster virus (VZV), human cytomegalovirus (CMV), Epstein-Barr virus (EBV), BK virus (BKV), and adenovirus (AdV) genomes were investigated in 152 different clinical specimens. The use of the SEAC did not influence the results of the different virus-specific PCRs. The SEAC results showed high reproducibility with a mean Cp value of 31.08±1.44, and were not influenced by the virus-specific PCR performed or the type of clinical specimen tested. The SEAC in the DNA extracts showed high stability during storage at both +4°C and -20°C. These data allowed establishing a new procedure for the validation of viral PCR results. In conclusion, the SEAC provides a reliable option for improving the diagnosis of opportunistic viral infections by laboratory-developed real-time PCR assays in quality assurance programs.

Comparison of the Idaho Technology FilmArray System to Real-Time PCR for Detection of Respiratory Pathogens in Children

The FilmArray Respiratory Panel (RP) multiplexed nucleic acid amplification test (Idaho Technology, Inc., Salt Lake City, UT) was compared to laboratory-developed real-time PCR assays for the detection of various respiratory viruses and certain bacterial pathogens. A total of 215 frozen archived pediatric respiratory specimens previously characterized as either negative or positive for one or more pathogens by real-time PCR were examined using the FilmArray RP system. Overall agreement between the FilmArray RP and corresponding real-time PCR assays for shared analytes was 98.6% (kappa = 0.92 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.89 to 0.94]). The combined positive percent agreement was 89.4% (95% CI, 85.4 to 92.6); the negative percent agreement was 99.6% (95% CI, 99.2 to 99.8). The mean real-time PCR threshold cycle (C(T)) value for specimens with discordant results was 36.46 ± 4.54. Detection of coinfections and correct identification of influenza A virus subtypes were comparable to those of real-time PCR when using the FilmArray RP. The greatest comparative difference in sensitivity was observed for adenovirus; only 11 of 24 (45.8%; 95% CI, 27.9 to 64.9) clinical specimens positive for adenovirus by real-time PCR were also positive by the FilmArray RP. In addition, upon testing 20 characterized adenovirus serotypes prepared at high and low viral loads, the FilmArray RP did not detect serotypes 6 and 41 at either level and failed to detect serotypes 2, 20, 35, and 37 when viral loads were low. The FilmArray RP system is rapid and extremely user-friendly, with results available in just over 1 h with almost no labor involved. Its low throughput is a significant drawback for laboratories receiving large numbers of specimens, as only a single sample can be processed at a time with one instrument.