Cargando…

Evaluation of a multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification assay for the detection of respiratory pathogens in oncological patients

BACKGROUND: Respiratory tract infections are widespread and may cause significant morbidity and mortality in immunosuppressed populations such as oncological patients. OBJECTIVES: The RealAccurate Respiratory RT PCR Kit covering 14 respiratory viruses was compared to the RespiFinder Smart22, a broad...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Berning, Lucia, Aberle, Stephan W., Simon, Benedikt, Luger, Christoph, Apfalter, Petra, Machherndl-Spandl, Sigrid, Kerschner, Heidrun
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier B.V. 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7106480/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24684925
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcv.2014.02.010
_version_ 1783512614489292800
author Berning, Lucia
Aberle, Stephan W.
Simon, Benedikt
Luger, Christoph
Apfalter, Petra
Machherndl-Spandl, Sigrid
Kerschner, Heidrun
author_facet Berning, Lucia
Aberle, Stephan W.
Simon, Benedikt
Luger, Christoph
Apfalter, Petra
Machherndl-Spandl, Sigrid
Kerschner, Heidrun
author_sort Berning, Lucia
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Respiratory tract infections are widespread and may cause significant morbidity and mortality in immunosuppressed populations such as oncological patients. OBJECTIVES: The RealAccurate Respiratory RT PCR Kit covering 14 respiratory viruses was compared to the RespiFinder Smart22, a broad-spectrum multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification (MLPA) test, targeting 22 viral and bacterial respiratory pathogens. STUDY DESIGN: After verification of its analytical performance, the clinical performance of the RespiFinder Smart22 was evaluated by re-analysis of 96 respiratory samples from oncological patients. Additionally, the time to result (TTR) of both methods was compared. RESULTS: The analytical performance of the RespiFinder Smart22 fulfilled all previously specified criteria. Concordant results in both assays were achieved in 74.0% of all clinical specimens and in 91.2% when only positive results were taken into account. The RespiFinder Smart22 yielded additional results in a total of 22 (22.9% of 96) samples due to higher test sensitivity and a broader, highly multiplexed spectrum of pathogens. The TTR of a typical routine test consisting of three samples were 206 and 356 min for the RealAccurate Respiratory RT PCR Kit and the RespiFinder Smart22, respectively. However, hands-on time was reduced by 59.0% applying the MLPA method. CONCLUSIONS: In our hands, the RespiFinder Smart22 showed excellent analytical performance while hands-on time was halved in comparison to the RT PCR method. Regarding the clinical evaluation, the MLPA method provided additional results in 22.9% (22/96) of specimens due to its comprehensive format, higher test sensitivity and the capability to detect 22 pathogens compared to 14 with the RealAccurate Respiratory RT PCR Kit.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7106480
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher Elsevier B.V.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-71064802020-03-31 Evaluation of a multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification assay for the detection of respiratory pathogens in oncological patients Berning, Lucia Aberle, Stephan W. Simon, Benedikt Luger, Christoph Apfalter, Petra Machherndl-Spandl, Sigrid Kerschner, Heidrun J Clin Virol Article BACKGROUND: Respiratory tract infections are widespread and may cause significant morbidity and mortality in immunosuppressed populations such as oncological patients. OBJECTIVES: The RealAccurate Respiratory RT PCR Kit covering 14 respiratory viruses was compared to the RespiFinder Smart22, a broad-spectrum multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification (MLPA) test, targeting 22 viral and bacterial respiratory pathogens. STUDY DESIGN: After verification of its analytical performance, the clinical performance of the RespiFinder Smart22 was evaluated by re-analysis of 96 respiratory samples from oncological patients. Additionally, the time to result (TTR) of both methods was compared. RESULTS: The analytical performance of the RespiFinder Smart22 fulfilled all previously specified criteria. Concordant results in both assays were achieved in 74.0% of all clinical specimens and in 91.2% when only positive results were taken into account. The RespiFinder Smart22 yielded additional results in a total of 22 (22.9% of 96) samples due to higher test sensitivity and a broader, highly multiplexed spectrum of pathogens. The TTR of a typical routine test consisting of three samples were 206 and 356 min for the RealAccurate Respiratory RT PCR Kit and the RespiFinder Smart22, respectively. However, hands-on time was reduced by 59.0% applying the MLPA method. CONCLUSIONS: In our hands, the RespiFinder Smart22 showed excellent analytical performance while hands-on time was halved in comparison to the RT PCR method. Regarding the clinical evaluation, the MLPA method provided additional results in 22.9% (22/96) of specimens due to its comprehensive format, higher test sensitivity and the capability to detect 22 pathogens compared to 14 with the RealAccurate Respiratory RT PCR Kit. Elsevier B.V. 2014-06 2014-03-06 /pmc/articles/PMC7106480/ /pubmed/24684925 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcv.2014.02.010 Text en Copyright © 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. Since January 2020 Elsevier has created a COVID-19 resource centre with free information in English and Mandarin on the novel coronavirus COVID-19. The COVID-19 resource centre is hosted on Elsevier Connect, the company's public news and information website. Elsevier hereby grants permission to make all its COVID-19-related research that is available on the COVID-19 resource centre - including this research content - immediately available in PubMed Central and other publicly funded repositories, such as the WHO COVID database with rights for unrestricted research re-use and analyses in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for free by Elsevier for as long as the COVID-19 resource centre remains active.
spellingShingle Article
Berning, Lucia
Aberle, Stephan W.
Simon, Benedikt
Luger, Christoph
Apfalter, Petra
Machherndl-Spandl, Sigrid
Kerschner, Heidrun
Evaluation of a multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification assay for the detection of respiratory pathogens in oncological patients
title Evaluation of a multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification assay for the detection of respiratory pathogens in oncological patients
title_full Evaluation of a multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification assay for the detection of respiratory pathogens in oncological patients
title_fullStr Evaluation of a multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification assay for the detection of respiratory pathogens in oncological patients
title_full_unstemmed Evaluation of a multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification assay for the detection of respiratory pathogens in oncological patients
title_short Evaluation of a multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification assay for the detection of respiratory pathogens in oncological patients
title_sort evaluation of a multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification assay for the detection of respiratory pathogens in oncological patients
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7106480/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24684925
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcv.2014.02.010
work_keys_str_mv AT berninglucia evaluationofamultiplexligationdependentprobeamplificationassayforthedetectionofrespiratorypathogensinoncologicalpatients
AT aberlestephanw evaluationofamultiplexligationdependentprobeamplificationassayforthedetectionofrespiratorypathogensinoncologicalpatients
AT simonbenedikt evaluationofamultiplexligationdependentprobeamplificationassayforthedetectionofrespiratorypathogensinoncologicalpatients
AT lugerchristoph evaluationofamultiplexligationdependentprobeamplificationassayforthedetectionofrespiratorypathogensinoncologicalpatients
AT apfalterpetra evaluationofamultiplexligationdependentprobeamplificationassayforthedetectionofrespiratorypathogensinoncologicalpatients
AT machherndlspandlsigrid evaluationofamultiplexligationdependentprobeamplificationassayforthedetectionofrespiratorypathogensinoncologicalpatients
AT kerschnerheidrun evaluationofamultiplexligationdependentprobeamplificationassayforthedetectionofrespiratorypathogensinoncologicalpatients