Dataset Information

Comparison of the Luminex xTAG respiratory viral panel with xTAG respiratory viral panel fast for diagnosis of respiratory virus infections.

ABSTRACT: Nucleic acid tests are sensitive and specific and provide a rapid diagnosis, making them invaluable for patient and outbreak management. Multiplex PCR assays have additional advantages in providing an economical and comprehensive panel for many common respiratory viruses. Previous reports have shown the utility of the xTAG respiratory viral panel (RVP) assay manufactured by Luminex Molecular Diagnostics for this purpose. A newer generation of this kit, released in Canada in early 2010, is designed to simplify the procedure and reduce the turnaround time by about 24 h. The assay methodology and targets included in this version of the kit are different; consequently, the objective of this study was to compare the detection of a panel of respiratory viral targets using the older Luminex xTAG RVP (RVP Classic) assay with that using the newer xTAG RVP Fast assay. This study included 334 respiratory specimens that had been characterized for a variety of respiratory viral targets; all samples were tested by both versions of the RVP assay in parallel. Overall, the RVP Classic assay was more sensitive than the RVP Fast assay (88.6% and 77.5% sensitivities, respectively) for all the viral targets combined. Targets not detected by the RVP Fast assay included primarily influenza B virus, parainfluenza virus type 2, and human coronavirus 229E. A small number of samples positive for influenza A virus, respiratory syncytial virus B, human metapneumovirus, and parainfluenza virus type 1 were not detected by the RVP Classic assay and in general had low viral loads.

SUBMITTER: Pabbaraju K

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3122679 | biostudies-literature | 2011 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Comparison of the Luminex xTAG respiratory viral panel with xTAG respiratory viral panel fast for diagnosis of respiratory virus infections.

Pabbaraju Kanti K Wong Sallene S Tokaryk Kara L KL Fonseca Kevin K Drews Steven J SJ

Journal of clinical microbiology 20110316 5

Nucleic acid tests are sensitive and specific and provide a rapid diagnosis, making them invaluable for patient and outbreak management. Multiplex PCR assays have additional advantages in providing an economical and comprehensive panel for many common respiratory viruses. Previous reports have shown the utility of the xTAG respiratory viral panel (RVP) assay manufactured by Luminex Molecular Diagnostics for this purpose. A newer generation of this kit, released in Canada in early 2010, is design ...[more]

PMID: 21411570

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundA broad spectrum of pathogens is causative for respiratory tract infections, but symptoms are mostly similar. Therefore, the identification of the causative viruses and bacteria is only feasible using multiplex PCR or several monoplex PCR tests in parallel.MethodsThe analytical sensitivity of three multiplex PCR assays, RespiFinder-19, RespiFinder-SMART-22 and xTAG-Respiratory-Virus-Panel-Fast-Assay (RVP), were compared to monoplex real-time PCR with quantified standardized control material. All assays include the most common respiratory pathogens.ResultsTo compare the analytical sensitivity of the multiplex assays, samples were inoculated with 13 different quantified viruses in the range of 10(1) to 10(5) copies/ml. Concordant results were received for rhinovirus, whereas the RVP detected influenzavirus, RSV and hMPV more frequently in low concentrations. The RespiFinder-19 and the RespiFinder-SMART-22 showed a higher analytical sensitivity for adenoviruses and coronaviruses, whereas the RVP was incapable to detect adenovirus and coronavirus in concentrations of 10(4) copies/ml. The RespiFinder-19 and RespiFinder-SMART-22A did not detect influenzaviruses (104 copies/ml) and RSV (10(3) copies/ml). The detection of all 13 viruses in one sample was only achieved using monoplex PCR. To analyze possible competitive amplification reactions between the different viruses, samples were further inoculated with only 4 different viruses in one sample. Compared to the detection of 13 viruses in parallel, only a few differences were found.The incidence of respiratory viruses was compared in tracheal secretion (TS) samples (n = 100) of mechanically ventilated patients in winter (n = 50) and summer (n = 50). In winter, respiratory viruses were detected in 32 TS samples (64%) by RespiFinder-19, whereas the detection rate with RVP was only 22%. The most frequent viruses were adenovirus (32%) and PIV-2 (20%). Multiple infections were detected in 16 TS samples (32%) by RespiFinder-19. Fewer infections were found in summer (RespiFinder-19: 20%; RVP: 6%). All positive results were verified using monoplex PCR.ConclusionsMultiplex PCR tests have a broad spectrum of pathogens to test at a time. Analysis of multiple inoculated samples revealed a different focus of the detected virus types by the three assays. Analysis of clinical samples showed a high concordance of detected viruses by the RespiFinder-19 compared to monoplex tests.

Dataset Information

Comparison of the Luminex xTAG respiratory viral panel with xTAG respiratory viral panel fast for diagnosis of respiratory virus infections.

Publications

Comparison of the Luminex xTAG respiratory viral panel with xTAG respiratory viral panel fast for diagnosis of respiratory virus infections.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets