Cargando…

Direct comparison of Xpert Xpress, FilmArray Respiratory Panel, Lumipulse antigen test, and RT-qPCR in 165 nasopharyngeal swabs

BACKGROUND: The nucleic acid amplification test (NAAT) and antigen test are approved diagnostic tests for COVID-19. In this study, we aimed to investigate the assay performance of two NAATs (Xpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2 and FilmArray Respiratory Panel) and a quantitative antigen test (Lumipulse). METHODS...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hirotsu, Yosuke, Maejima, Makoto, Shibusawa, Masahiro, Natori, Yume, Nagakubo, Yuki, Hosaka, Kazuhiro, Sueki, Hitomi, Amemiya, Kenji, Hayakawa, Miyoko, Mochizuki, Hitoshi, Tsutsui, Toshiharu, Kakizaki, Yumiko, Miyashita, Yoshihiro, Omata, Masao
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8894560/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35246055
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12879-022-07185-w
_version_ 1784662699690426368
author Hirotsu, Yosuke
Maejima, Makoto
Shibusawa, Masahiro
Natori, Yume
Nagakubo, Yuki
Hosaka, Kazuhiro
Sueki, Hitomi
Amemiya, Kenji
Hayakawa, Miyoko
Mochizuki, Hitoshi
Tsutsui, Toshiharu
Kakizaki, Yumiko
Miyashita, Yoshihiro
Omata, Masao
author_facet Hirotsu, Yosuke
Maejima, Makoto
Shibusawa, Masahiro
Natori, Yume
Nagakubo, Yuki
Hosaka, Kazuhiro
Sueki, Hitomi
Amemiya, Kenji
Hayakawa, Miyoko
Mochizuki, Hitoshi
Tsutsui, Toshiharu
Kakizaki, Yumiko
Miyashita, Yoshihiro
Omata, Masao
author_sort Hirotsu, Yosuke
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The nucleic acid amplification test (NAAT) and antigen test are approved diagnostic tests for COVID-19. In this study, we aimed to investigate the assay performance of two NAATs (Xpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2 and FilmArray Respiratory Panel) and a quantitative antigen test (Lumipulse). METHODS: One hundred and sixty-five nasopharyngeal swabs were subjected to Xpert, FilmArray, Lumipulse, and RT-qPCR assays. RESULTS: Of 165 samples, RT-qPCR showed 100 positives and 65 negatives. The Xpert had an overall agreement of 99.4% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 96.7–99.4%), sensitivity of 99% (95% CI: 96.8–99%), and specificity of 100% (95% CI: 96.6–100%). FilmArray had an overall agreement of 98.8% (95% CI: 95.9–98.8%), sensitivity of 98% (95% CI: 95.6–98%), and specificity of 100% (95% CI: 96.3–100%). Lumipulse had an overall agreement of 95.5% (95% CI: 91.8–95.5%), sensitivity of 92.3% (95% CI: 89.2–92.3%), and specificity of 100% (95% CI: 95.5–100%). The κ coefficient showed excellent agreement between each test and RT-qPCR. There was a high correlation between Xpert Ct values, RT-qPCR Ct values, viral loads and antigen level. CONCLUSIONS: Xpert Xpress and FilmArray Respiratory Panel exhibited an equivalent performance. The Lumipulse antigen test was slightly less sensitive than the NAATs, but showed high assay performance except for samples with low viral load. The Xpert Xpress, FilmArray Respiratory Panel and Lumipulse antigen tests offer rapid sample-to-answer data, allowing random access detection on automated devices.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8894560
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-88945602022-03-04 Direct comparison of Xpert Xpress, FilmArray Respiratory Panel, Lumipulse antigen test, and RT-qPCR in 165 nasopharyngeal swabs Hirotsu, Yosuke Maejima, Makoto Shibusawa, Masahiro Natori, Yume Nagakubo, Yuki Hosaka, Kazuhiro Sueki, Hitomi Amemiya, Kenji Hayakawa, Miyoko Mochizuki, Hitoshi Tsutsui, Toshiharu Kakizaki, Yumiko Miyashita, Yoshihiro Omata, Masao BMC Infect Dis Research Article BACKGROUND: The nucleic acid amplification test (NAAT) and antigen test are approved diagnostic tests for COVID-19. In this study, we aimed to investigate the assay performance of two NAATs (Xpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2 and FilmArray Respiratory Panel) and a quantitative antigen test (Lumipulse). METHODS: One hundred and sixty-five nasopharyngeal swabs were subjected to Xpert, FilmArray, Lumipulse, and RT-qPCR assays. RESULTS: Of 165 samples, RT-qPCR showed 100 positives and 65 negatives. The Xpert had an overall agreement of 99.4% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 96.7–99.4%), sensitivity of 99% (95% CI: 96.8–99%), and specificity of 100% (95% CI: 96.6–100%). FilmArray had an overall agreement of 98.8% (95% CI: 95.9–98.8%), sensitivity of 98% (95% CI: 95.6–98%), and specificity of 100% (95% CI: 96.3–100%). Lumipulse had an overall agreement of 95.5% (95% CI: 91.8–95.5%), sensitivity of 92.3% (95% CI: 89.2–92.3%), and specificity of 100% (95% CI: 95.5–100%). The κ coefficient showed excellent agreement between each test and RT-qPCR. There was a high correlation between Xpert Ct values, RT-qPCR Ct values, viral loads and antigen level. CONCLUSIONS: Xpert Xpress and FilmArray Respiratory Panel exhibited an equivalent performance. The Lumipulse antigen test was slightly less sensitive than the NAATs, but showed high assay performance except for samples with low viral load. The Xpert Xpress, FilmArray Respiratory Panel and Lumipulse antigen tests offer rapid sample-to-answer data, allowing random access detection on automated devices. BioMed Central 2022-03-04 /pmc/articles/PMC8894560/ /pubmed/35246055 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12879-022-07185-w Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research Article
Hirotsu, Yosuke
Maejima, Makoto
Shibusawa, Masahiro
Natori, Yume
Nagakubo, Yuki
Hosaka, Kazuhiro
Sueki, Hitomi
Amemiya, Kenji
Hayakawa, Miyoko
Mochizuki, Hitoshi
Tsutsui, Toshiharu
Kakizaki, Yumiko
Miyashita, Yoshihiro
Omata, Masao
Direct comparison of Xpert Xpress, FilmArray Respiratory Panel, Lumipulse antigen test, and RT-qPCR in 165 nasopharyngeal swabs
title Direct comparison of Xpert Xpress, FilmArray Respiratory Panel, Lumipulse antigen test, and RT-qPCR in 165 nasopharyngeal swabs
title_full Direct comparison of Xpert Xpress, FilmArray Respiratory Panel, Lumipulse antigen test, and RT-qPCR in 165 nasopharyngeal swabs
title_fullStr Direct comparison of Xpert Xpress, FilmArray Respiratory Panel, Lumipulse antigen test, and RT-qPCR in 165 nasopharyngeal swabs
title_full_unstemmed Direct comparison of Xpert Xpress, FilmArray Respiratory Panel, Lumipulse antigen test, and RT-qPCR in 165 nasopharyngeal swabs
title_short Direct comparison of Xpert Xpress, FilmArray Respiratory Panel, Lumipulse antigen test, and RT-qPCR in 165 nasopharyngeal swabs
title_sort direct comparison of xpert xpress, filmarray respiratory panel, lumipulse antigen test, and rt-qpcr in 165 nasopharyngeal swabs
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8894560/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35246055
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12879-022-07185-w
work_keys_str_mv AT hirotsuyosuke directcomparisonofxpertxpressfilmarrayrespiratorypanellumipulseantigentestandrtqpcrin165nasopharyngealswabs
AT maejimamakoto directcomparisonofxpertxpressfilmarrayrespiratorypanellumipulseantigentestandrtqpcrin165nasopharyngealswabs
AT shibusawamasahiro directcomparisonofxpertxpressfilmarrayrespiratorypanellumipulseantigentestandrtqpcrin165nasopharyngealswabs
AT natoriyume directcomparisonofxpertxpressfilmarrayrespiratorypanellumipulseantigentestandrtqpcrin165nasopharyngealswabs
AT nagakuboyuki directcomparisonofxpertxpressfilmarrayrespiratorypanellumipulseantigentestandrtqpcrin165nasopharyngealswabs
AT hosakakazuhiro directcomparisonofxpertxpressfilmarrayrespiratorypanellumipulseantigentestandrtqpcrin165nasopharyngealswabs
AT suekihitomi directcomparisonofxpertxpressfilmarrayrespiratorypanellumipulseantigentestandrtqpcrin165nasopharyngealswabs
AT amemiyakenji directcomparisonofxpertxpressfilmarrayrespiratorypanellumipulseantigentestandrtqpcrin165nasopharyngealswabs
AT hayakawamiyoko directcomparisonofxpertxpressfilmarrayrespiratorypanellumipulseantigentestandrtqpcrin165nasopharyngealswabs
AT mochizukihitoshi directcomparisonofxpertxpressfilmarrayrespiratorypanellumipulseantigentestandrtqpcrin165nasopharyngealswabs
AT tsutsuitoshiharu directcomparisonofxpertxpressfilmarrayrespiratorypanellumipulseantigentestandrtqpcrin165nasopharyngealswabs
AT kakizakiyumiko directcomparisonofxpertxpressfilmarrayrespiratorypanellumipulseantigentestandrtqpcrin165nasopharyngealswabs
AT miyashitayoshihiro directcomparisonofxpertxpressfilmarrayrespiratorypanellumipulseantigentestandrtqpcrin165nasopharyngealswabs
AT omatamasao directcomparisonofxpertxpressfilmarrayrespiratorypanellumipulseantigentestandrtqpcrin165nasopharyngealswabs