Cargando…
Clinical performance of Roche cobas 6800, Luminex ARIES, MiRXES Fortitude Kit 2.1, Altona RealStar, and Applied Biosystems TaqPath for SARS‐CoV‐2 detection in nasopharyngeal swabs
We compared the performance of five assays for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2) detection on nasopharyngeal swab samples: Roche “cobas,” Luminex “ARIES,” MiRXES “Fortitude,” Altona “RealStar,” and Thermo Fisher Scientific “TaqPath.” A total of 94 nasopharyngeal swab sampl...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8250924/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33719033 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jmv.26940 |
_version_ | 1783717076534296576 |
---|---|
author | Lee, Chun Kiat Tham, Jason Wei Ming Png, Siyu Chai, Chean Nee Ng, Shu Chi Tan, Eunice Jia Min Ng, Li Jie Chua, Rui Ping Sani, Musa Seow, Yiqi Yan, Gabriel Tang, Julian |
author_facet | Lee, Chun Kiat Tham, Jason Wei Ming Png, Siyu Chai, Chean Nee Ng, Shu Chi Tan, Eunice Jia Min Ng, Li Jie Chua, Rui Ping Sani, Musa Seow, Yiqi Yan, Gabriel Tang, Julian |
author_sort | Lee, Chun Kiat |
collection | PubMed |
description | We compared the performance of five assays for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2) detection on nasopharyngeal swab samples: Roche “cobas,” Luminex “ARIES,” MiRXES “Fortitude,” Altona “RealStar,” and Thermo Fisher Scientific “TaqPath.” A total of 94 nasopharyngeal swab samples were obtained from 80 confirmed coronavirus disease 2019 cases in the first 2 weeks of illness (median, 7 days; range, 2–14 days) and 14 healthy controls. After collection, all samples were transported to the hospital clinical laboratory within 24 h. These samples were tested on all five assays within 3 days of sample receipt. Of the 94 samples, 69 yielded the same result on all platforms, resulting in an agreement of 73.4% (69 of 94). Of these, 14 were the healthy control swabs which all tested negative, demonstrating good specificity across all platforms. The ARIES assay had the lowest detection rate (68.8%), followed by Fortitude (85.0%), RealStar (86.3%), cobas (95.0%), and TaqPath (100%). Statistically significant differences were observed for ARIES, Fortitude, and RealStar when compared against the best performing TaqPath using McNemar's χ (2) test. A consensus result was established based on the results obtained by the cobas, Fortitude, RealStar, and TaqPath. Six discrepancies had failed to reach a consensus and were adjudicated using the Cepheid Xpert Xpress SARS‐CoV‐2. Overall, the TaqPath and cobas assays were the most sensitive at detecting their designated SARS‐CoV‐2 gene targets. On the other hand, the ARIES assay was the least sensitive, thus warranting the need for assay re‐optimization before go‐live at the testing laboratory. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8250924 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-82509242021-07-02 Clinical performance of Roche cobas 6800, Luminex ARIES, MiRXES Fortitude Kit 2.1, Altona RealStar, and Applied Biosystems TaqPath for SARS‐CoV‐2 detection in nasopharyngeal swabs Lee, Chun Kiat Tham, Jason Wei Ming Png, Siyu Chai, Chean Nee Ng, Shu Chi Tan, Eunice Jia Min Ng, Li Jie Chua, Rui Ping Sani, Musa Seow, Yiqi Yan, Gabriel Tang, Julian J Med Virol Short Communications We compared the performance of five assays for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2) detection on nasopharyngeal swab samples: Roche “cobas,” Luminex “ARIES,” MiRXES “Fortitude,” Altona “RealStar,” and Thermo Fisher Scientific “TaqPath.” A total of 94 nasopharyngeal swab samples were obtained from 80 confirmed coronavirus disease 2019 cases in the first 2 weeks of illness (median, 7 days; range, 2–14 days) and 14 healthy controls. After collection, all samples were transported to the hospital clinical laboratory within 24 h. These samples were tested on all five assays within 3 days of sample receipt. Of the 94 samples, 69 yielded the same result on all platforms, resulting in an agreement of 73.4% (69 of 94). Of these, 14 were the healthy control swabs which all tested negative, demonstrating good specificity across all platforms. The ARIES assay had the lowest detection rate (68.8%), followed by Fortitude (85.0%), RealStar (86.3%), cobas (95.0%), and TaqPath (100%). Statistically significant differences were observed for ARIES, Fortitude, and RealStar when compared against the best performing TaqPath using McNemar's χ (2) test. A consensus result was established based on the results obtained by the cobas, Fortitude, RealStar, and TaqPath. Six discrepancies had failed to reach a consensus and were adjudicated using the Cepheid Xpert Xpress SARS‐CoV‐2. Overall, the TaqPath and cobas assays were the most sensitive at detecting their designated SARS‐CoV‐2 gene targets. On the other hand, the ARIES assay was the least sensitive, thus warranting the need for assay re‐optimization before go‐live at the testing laboratory. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2021-03-30 2021-07 /pmc/articles/PMC8250924/ /pubmed/33719033 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jmv.26940 Text en © 2021 The Authors. Journal of Medical Virology Published by Wiley Periodicals LLC https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Short Communications Lee, Chun Kiat Tham, Jason Wei Ming Png, Siyu Chai, Chean Nee Ng, Shu Chi Tan, Eunice Jia Min Ng, Li Jie Chua, Rui Ping Sani, Musa Seow, Yiqi Yan, Gabriel Tang, Julian Clinical performance of Roche cobas 6800, Luminex ARIES, MiRXES Fortitude Kit 2.1, Altona RealStar, and Applied Biosystems TaqPath for SARS‐CoV‐2 detection in nasopharyngeal swabs |
title | Clinical performance of Roche cobas 6800, Luminex ARIES, MiRXES Fortitude Kit 2.1, Altona RealStar, and Applied Biosystems TaqPath for SARS‐CoV‐2 detection in nasopharyngeal swabs |
title_full | Clinical performance of Roche cobas 6800, Luminex ARIES, MiRXES Fortitude Kit 2.1, Altona RealStar, and Applied Biosystems TaqPath for SARS‐CoV‐2 detection in nasopharyngeal swabs |
title_fullStr | Clinical performance of Roche cobas 6800, Luminex ARIES, MiRXES Fortitude Kit 2.1, Altona RealStar, and Applied Biosystems TaqPath for SARS‐CoV‐2 detection in nasopharyngeal swabs |
title_full_unstemmed | Clinical performance of Roche cobas 6800, Luminex ARIES, MiRXES Fortitude Kit 2.1, Altona RealStar, and Applied Biosystems TaqPath for SARS‐CoV‐2 detection in nasopharyngeal swabs |
title_short | Clinical performance of Roche cobas 6800, Luminex ARIES, MiRXES Fortitude Kit 2.1, Altona RealStar, and Applied Biosystems TaqPath for SARS‐CoV‐2 detection in nasopharyngeal swabs |
title_sort | clinical performance of roche cobas 6800, luminex aries, mirxes fortitude kit 2.1, altona realstar, and applied biosystems taqpath for sars‐cov‐2 detection in nasopharyngeal swabs |
topic | Short Communications |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8250924/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33719033 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jmv.26940 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT leechunkiat clinicalperformanceofrochecobas6800luminexariesmirxesfortitudekit21altonarealstarandappliedbiosystemstaqpathforsarscov2detectioninnasopharyngealswabs AT thamjasonweiming clinicalperformanceofrochecobas6800luminexariesmirxesfortitudekit21altonarealstarandappliedbiosystemstaqpathforsarscov2detectioninnasopharyngealswabs AT pngsiyu clinicalperformanceofrochecobas6800luminexariesmirxesfortitudekit21altonarealstarandappliedbiosystemstaqpathforsarscov2detectioninnasopharyngealswabs AT chaicheannee clinicalperformanceofrochecobas6800luminexariesmirxesfortitudekit21altonarealstarandappliedbiosystemstaqpathforsarscov2detectioninnasopharyngealswabs AT ngshuchi clinicalperformanceofrochecobas6800luminexariesmirxesfortitudekit21altonarealstarandappliedbiosystemstaqpathforsarscov2detectioninnasopharyngealswabs AT taneunicejiamin clinicalperformanceofrochecobas6800luminexariesmirxesfortitudekit21altonarealstarandappliedbiosystemstaqpathforsarscov2detectioninnasopharyngealswabs AT nglijie clinicalperformanceofrochecobas6800luminexariesmirxesfortitudekit21altonarealstarandappliedbiosystemstaqpathforsarscov2detectioninnasopharyngealswabs AT chuaruiping clinicalperformanceofrochecobas6800luminexariesmirxesfortitudekit21altonarealstarandappliedbiosystemstaqpathforsarscov2detectioninnasopharyngealswabs AT sanimusa clinicalperformanceofrochecobas6800luminexariesmirxesfortitudekit21altonarealstarandappliedbiosystemstaqpathforsarscov2detectioninnasopharyngealswabs AT seowyiqi clinicalperformanceofrochecobas6800luminexariesmirxesfortitudekit21altonarealstarandappliedbiosystemstaqpathforsarscov2detectioninnasopharyngealswabs AT yangabriel clinicalperformanceofrochecobas6800luminexariesmirxesfortitudekit21altonarealstarandappliedbiosystemstaqpathforsarscov2detectioninnasopharyngealswabs AT tangjulian clinicalperformanceofrochecobas6800luminexariesmirxesfortitudekit21altonarealstarandappliedbiosystemstaqpathforsarscov2detectioninnasopharyngealswabs |