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-...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
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 |