Cargando…

Clinical Evaluation of Three Commercial RT-PCR Kits for Routine COVID-19 Diagnosis

Amongst the multiple ways to diagnose coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19), reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) remains the reference gold standard, providing fast and accurate results. This study evaluated and compared the performance of three commercially available COVID-19 RT-...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Juthi, Rifat Tasnim, Sazed, Saiful Arefeen, Zamil, Md Fahad, Alam, Mohammad Shafiul
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9692919/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36422640
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/pathogens11111389
_version_ 1784837396593901568
author Juthi, Rifat Tasnim
Sazed, Saiful Arefeen
Zamil, Md Fahad
Alam, Mohammad Shafiul
author_facet Juthi, Rifat Tasnim
Sazed, Saiful Arefeen
Zamil, Md Fahad
Alam, Mohammad Shafiul
author_sort Juthi, Rifat Tasnim
collection PubMed
description Amongst the multiple ways to diagnose coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19), reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) remains the reference gold standard, providing fast and accurate results. This study evaluated and compared the performance of three commercially available COVID-19 RT-PCR kits-Aridia(®) COVID-19 Real-Time PCR Test (CTK Biotech, Inc., Poway, CA, USA), Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) Nucleic Acid Detection Kit (Sansure Biotech Inc., Changsha, China) and Allplex(TM) 2019-nCoV assay (Seegene Inc., Seoul, Republic of Korea) for the detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). A total of 326 clinically suspected patients were enrolled for the study, and among them, 209 were diagnosed as positive and 117 as negative when tested with the reference method, US CDC 2019-Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) Real Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel. The Aridia(®) kit showed total agreement with the reference test, with a sensitivity of 100% (95% CI: 98.25% to 100.0%) and a specificity of 100% (96.90% to 100.00%). The Allplex(TM) kit also showed 100% specificity (95% CI: 96.90% to 100.00%), but a lower sensitivity (98.09%, 95% CI: 95.17% to 99.48%). Among the three kits, the Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) Nucleic Acid Detection Kit showed the worst performance, with a sensitivity of 98.6% (95% CI: 95.9% to 99.7%) and a specificity of 95.73, 95% (CI: 90.31% to 98.60%). While all these kits conform to the requirement for routine molecular diagnosis with high performances, the Aridia(®) COVID-19 Real-Time PCR Test showed the best performance among the three kits.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9692919
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-96929192022-11-26 Clinical Evaluation of Three Commercial RT-PCR Kits for Routine COVID-19 Diagnosis Juthi, Rifat Tasnim Sazed, Saiful Arefeen Zamil, Md Fahad Alam, Mohammad Shafiul Pathogens Article Amongst the multiple ways to diagnose coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19), reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) remains the reference gold standard, providing fast and accurate results. This study evaluated and compared the performance of three commercially available COVID-19 RT-PCR kits-Aridia(®) COVID-19 Real-Time PCR Test (CTK Biotech, Inc., Poway, CA, USA), Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) Nucleic Acid Detection Kit (Sansure Biotech Inc., Changsha, China) and Allplex(TM) 2019-nCoV assay (Seegene Inc., Seoul, Republic of Korea) for the detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). A total of 326 clinically suspected patients were enrolled for the study, and among them, 209 were diagnosed as positive and 117 as negative when tested with the reference method, US CDC 2019-Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) Real Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel. The Aridia(®) kit showed total agreement with the reference test, with a sensitivity of 100% (95% CI: 98.25% to 100.0%) and a specificity of 100% (96.90% to 100.00%). The Allplex(TM) kit also showed 100% specificity (95% CI: 96.90% to 100.00%), but a lower sensitivity (98.09%, 95% CI: 95.17% to 99.48%). Among the three kits, the Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) Nucleic Acid Detection Kit showed the worst performance, with a sensitivity of 98.6% (95% CI: 95.9% to 99.7%) and a specificity of 95.73, 95% (CI: 90.31% to 98.60%). While all these kits conform to the requirement for routine molecular diagnosis with high performances, the Aridia(®) COVID-19 Real-Time PCR Test showed the best performance among the three kits. MDPI 2022-11-21 /pmc/articles/PMC9692919/ /pubmed/36422640 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/pathogens11111389 Text en © 2022 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Juthi, Rifat Tasnim
Sazed, Saiful Arefeen
Zamil, Md Fahad
Alam, Mohammad Shafiul
Clinical Evaluation of Three Commercial RT-PCR Kits for Routine COVID-19 Diagnosis
title Clinical Evaluation of Three Commercial RT-PCR Kits for Routine COVID-19 Diagnosis
title_full Clinical Evaluation of Three Commercial RT-PCR Kits for Routine COVID-19 Diagnosis
title_fullStr Clinical Evaluation of Three Commercial RT-PCR Kits for Routine COVID-19 Diagnosis
title_full_unstemmed Clinical Evaluation of Three Commercial RT-PCR Kits for Routine COVID-19 Diagnosis
title_short Clinical Evaluation of Three Commercial RT-PCR Kits for Routine COVID-19 Diagnosis
title_sort clinical evaluation of three commercial rt-pcr kits for routine covid-19 diagnosis
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9692919/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36422640
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/pathogens11111389
work_keys_str_mv AT juthirifattasnim clinicalevaluationofthreecommercialrtpcrkitsforroutinecovid19diagnosis
AT sazedsaifularefeen clinicalevaluationofthreecommercialrtpcrkitsforroutinecovid19diagnosis
AT zamilmdfahad clinicalevaluationofthreecommercialrtpcrkitsforroutinecovid19diagnosis
AT alammohammadshafiul clinicalevaluationofthreecommercialrtpcrkitsforroutinecovid19diagnosis