Various diagnostic tests utilizing different principles are currently under development for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). However, these tests can occasionally produce discrepant results, causing confusion in their interpretation. Here, we evaluated the performance and features of three diagnostic assays: quantitative reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR), FilmArray Respiratory Panel (RP) v2.1, and the LUMIPULSE antigen test. Twenty-seven serial nasopharyngeal swabs were collected from a prolonged viral shedding patient who had been hospitalized for 51 days. We examined the SARS-CoV-2 detection rates of the three tests. The overall agreement rate was 81% between RT-qPCR and FilmArray RP v2.1, 63% between the antigen test and FilmArray RP v2.1, and 59% between the antigen test and RT-qPCR. We obtained concordant results in samples with high viral loads (low threshold cycle values) by all three tests. RT-qPCR and FilmArray RP v2.1 accurately detected SARS-CoV-2 at the early to intermediate phases of infection, but the results varied at the late phase. The antigen test also produced a positive result at the early phase but varied at the intermediate phase and consistently produced negative results at late phase of infection. These results demonstrated FilmArray RP v2.1 could detect SARS-CoV-2 with accuracy comparable to RT-qPCR. Further, there were discrepant results using different types of diagnostic tests during the clinical course of prolonged viral shedding patient. We provided insights into how to utilize different types of kits to assess and manage SARS-CoV-2 infections.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7598429PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jiac.2020.10.026DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

rt-qpcr filmarray
16
antigen test
16
filmarray v21
16
viral shedding
12
shedding patient
12
filmarray respiratory
8
respiratory panel
8
panel v21
8
diagnostic tests
8
prolonged viral
8

Similar Publications

The COVID-19 pandemic circumstances have varied the pathogens related to acute respiratory infections (ARI), and most specialists have ignored them due to SARS-CoV-2's similar symptomatology. We identify respiratory pathogens with multiplex PCR in samples with presumptive SARS-CoV-2 but negative RT-qPCR results. We performed a retrospective transversal study employing clinical data and nasopharyngeal swab samples from patients with suspected clinical SARS-CoV-2 infection and a negative PCR result in a private laboratory in Lima, Peru.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

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.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Analysis of a persistent viral shedding patient infected with SARS-CoV-2 by RT-qPCR, FilmArray Respiratory Panel v2.1, and antigen detection.

J Infect Chemother

February 2021

Department of Gastroenterology, Yamanashi Central Hospital, 1-1-1 Fujimi, Kofu, Yamanashi, Japan; The University of Tokyo, 7-3-1 Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, Japan.

Various diagnostic tests utilizing different principles are currently under development for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). However, these tests can occasionally produce discrepant results, causing confusion in their interpretation. Here, we evaluated the performance and features of three diagnostic assays: quantitative reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR), FilmArray Respiratory Panel (RP) v2.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Preliminary evaluation of BioFire FilmArray Gastrointestinal Panel for the detection of noroviruses and other enteric viruses from wastewater and shellfish.

Environ Sci Pollut Res Int

September 2018

Institute of Environmental Science and Research Ltd (ESR), Kenepuru Science Centre, PO Box 50348, Porirua, 5240, New Zealand.

The BioFire FilmArray Gastrointestinal Panel was evaluated for the rapid detection of adenovirus, astrovirus, norovirus, rotavirus and sapovirus from influent and effluent wastewater and shellfish. The multiplex BioFire FilmArray Gastrointestinal Panel compared well to singleplex qPCR/RT-qPCR methods for the detection of adenovirus, astrovirus, rotavirus and sapovirus from influent and effluent wastewater samples. However, the BioFire FilmArray Gastrointestinal Panel showed poor performance for the detection of norovirus, significantly underestimating its presence in wastewater and shellfish samples when compared with the singleplex norovirus GI and GII RT-qPCR assays.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!