Cargando…
Comparison of four multiplex PCR assays for the detection of viral pathogens in respiratory specimens
Multiplex PCR has become the test of choice for the detection of multiple respiratory viruses in clinical specimens. However, there are few direct comparisons of different PCR assays. This study compares 4 different multiplex PCR assays for the recovery of common respiratory viruses. We tested 213 r...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Elsevier B.V.
2013
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7119551/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23583489 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jviromet.2013.04.005 |
_version_ | 1783514789091213312 |
---|---|
author | Anderson, Trevor P. Werno, Anja M. Barratt, Kevin Mahagamasekera, Patalee Murdoch, David R. Jennings, Lance C. |
author_facet | Anderson, Trevor P. Werno, Anja M. Barratt, Kevin Mahagamasekera, Patalee Murdoch, David R. Jennings, Lance C. |
author_sort | Anderson, Trevor P. |
collection | PubMed |
description | Multiplex PCR has become the test of choice for the detection of multiple respiratory viruses in clinical specimens. However, there are few direct comparisons of different PCR assays. This study compares 4 different multiplex PCR assays for the recovery of common respiratory viruses. We tested 213 respiratory specimens using four different multiplex PCR assays: the xTAG respiratory viral panel fast (Abbott Molecular Laboratories), Fast-track Respiratory Pathogen assay (Fast-track Diagnostics), Easyplex respiratory pathogen 12 kit (Ausdiagnostics), and an in-house multiplex real-time PCR assay. The performance of the four assays was very similar, with 93–100% agreement for all comparisons. Other issues, such as through-put, technical requirements and cost, are likely to be as important for making a decision about which of these assays to use given their comparative performance. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7119551 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2013 |
publisher | Elsevier B.V. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-71195512020-04-08 Comparison of four multiplex PCR assays for the detection of viral pathogens in respiratory specimens Anderson, Trevor P. Werno, Anja M. Barratt, Kevin Mahagamasekera, Patalee Murdoch, David R. Jennings, Lance C. J Virol Methods Article Multiplex PCR has become the test of choice for the detection of multiple respiratory viruses in clinical specimens. However, there are few direct comparisons of different PCR assays. This study compares 4 different multiplex PCR assays for the recovery of common respiratory viruses. We tested 213 respiratory specimens using four different multiplex PCR assays: the xTAG respiratory viral panel fast (Abbott Molecular Laboratories), Fast-track Respiratory Pathogen assay (Fast-track Diagnostics), Easyplex respiratory pathogen 12 kit (Ausdiagnostics), and an in-house multiplex real-time PCR assay. The performance of the four assays was very similar, with 93–100% agreement for all comparisons. Other issues, such as through-put, technical requirements and cost, are likely to be as important for making a decision about which of these assays to use given their comparative performance. Elsevier B.V. 2013-08 2013-04-11 /pmc/articles/PMC7119551/ /pubmed/23583489 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jviromet.2013.04.005 Text en Copyright © 2013 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 Anderson, Trevor P. Werno, Anja M. Barratt, Kevin Mahagamasekera, Patalee Murdoch, David R. Jennings, Lance C. Comparison of four multiplex PCR assays for the detection of viral pathogens in respiratory specimens |
title | Comparison of four multiplex PCR assays for the detection of viral pathogens in respiratory specimens |
title_full | Comparison of four multiplex PCR assays for the detection of viral pathogens in respiratory specimens |
title_fullStr | Comparison of four multiplex PCR assays for the detection of viral pathogens in respiratory specimens |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of four multiplex PCR assays for the detection of viral pathogens in respiratory specimens |
title_short | Comparison of four multiplex PCR assays for the detection of viral pathogens in respiratory specimens |
title_sort | comparison of four multiplex pcr assays for the detection of viral pathogens in respiratory specimens |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7119551/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23583489 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jviromet.2013.04.005 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT andersontrevorp comparisonoffourmultiplexpcrassaysforthedetectionofviralpathogensinrespiratoryspecimens AT wernoanjam comparisonoffourmultiplexpcrassaysforthedetectionofviralpathogensinrespiratoryspecimens AT barrattkevin comparisonoffourmultiplexpcrassaysforthedetectionofviralpathogensinrespiratoryspecimens AT mahagamasekerapatalee comparisonoffourmultiplexpcrassaysforthedetectionofviralpathogensinrespiratoryspecimens AT murdochdavidr comparisonoffourmultiplexpcrassaysforthedetectionofviralpathogensinrespiratoryspecimens AT jenningslancec comparisonoffourmultiplexpcrassaysforthedetectionofviralpathogensinrespiratoryspecimens |