Performance evaluation of direct fluorescent antibody, Focus Diagnostics Simplexa™ Flu A/B & RSV and multi-parameter customized respiratory Taqman® array card in immunocompromised patients

BACKGROUND: Molecular assays for diagnosis of Flu A, Flu B, and RSV with short turn-around-time (TAT) are of considerable clinical importance. In addition, rapid and accurate diagnosis of a large panel of viral and atypical pathogens can be crucial in immunocompromised patients. OBJECTIVES: First, to evaluate the performance of the Simplexa™ Direct assay system in comparison with direct fluorescent antibody (DFA) and customized Taqman® Array Card (TAC) testing for RSV, Flu A, and Flu B in immunocompromised patients. Second, to evaluate different algorithms for the detection of respiratory pathogens in terms of cost, turn-around-time (TAT) and diagnostic yield. STUDY DESIGN: We collected 125 nasopharyngeal swabs (NTS) and 25 BAL samples from symptomatic immunocompromised patients. Samples for which Simplexa™ and TAC results were discordant underwent verification testing. The TAC assay is based on singleplex RT-PCR, targeting 24 viruses, 8 bacteria and 2 fungi simultaneously. RESULTS: The overall sensitivity was significantly lower for DFA testing than for the two molecular methods (p < 0.05). Performance characteristics of Simplexa™ testing were not significantly different compared to TAC testing (p > 0.1). For BAL samples only, the sensitivity and specificity of the Simplexa™ assay was 100%. In total, 6.7, 16 and 18% of samples were positive for Flu A, Flu B or RSV by DFA, Simplexa™ and TAC testing, respectively. When considering not only these pathogens but also all results for TAC, the method identified 93 samples with one or more respiratory pathogens (62%). A co-infection rate of 15.3% was found by TAC. The estimated costs and TAT were 8.2€ and 2 h for DFA, 31.8€ and 1.5 h for Simplexa™ and 55€ and 3 h for TAC testing. CONCLUSIONS: Performing the Simplexa™ test 24 h a day/7 days a week instead of DFA would considerably improve the overall sensitivity and time-to-result, albeit at a higher cost generated in the laboratory. Performing the TAC would increase the diagnostic yield and detection of co-infections significantly.