Dataset Information

Multicenter Clinical Evaluation of the Automated Aries Bordetella Assay.

ABSTRACT: Molecular methods offer superior sensitivity and specificity and reduce testing turnaround time from days to hours for detection of Bordetella pertussis and Bordetella parapertussis In this study, we evaluated the performance of the automated PCR-based Aries Bordetella Assay, which detects both B. pertussis and B. parapertussis directly from nasopharyngeal swab specimens. The limits of detection (LoDs) were 1,800 CFU·ml-1 for B. pertussis and 213 CFU·ml-1 for B. parapertussis The assay detected 16/18 unique B. pertussis/B. parapertussis strains. Of 71 potentially cross-reacting organisms, 5 generated false positives in 1/6 replicates; none of 6 additional Bordetella spp. were erroneously detected. Specimens were stable at 20?to?25°C for at least 10?h, at 4?to?8°C for 10?days, and at temperatures not exceeding -70°C for 6?months. Of 1,052 nasopharyngeal specimens from patients with suspected pertussis, 3.0% (n = 32) were B. pertussis positive and 0.2% (n = 2) were B. parapertussis positive. Combining these data with Aries Bordetella Assay data from 57 nasopharyngeal samples with previously confirmed B. pertussis or B. parapertussis data and with data from 50 contrived B. parapertussis samples, the proportions of positive and negative agreement of the respective Aries assays with the reference assays were 97.1% and 99.0% for B. pertussis and 100% and 99.7% for B. parapertussis The Aries Bordetella Assay provides accurate detection and distinction of B. pertussis and B. parapertussis infections within 2?h. (This study has been registered at ClinicalTrials.gov under registration no. NCT02862262.).

SUBMITTER: Relich RF

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6355524 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Multicenter Clinical Evaluation of the Automated Aries Bordetella Assay.

Relich Ryan F RF Leber Amy A Young Stephen S Schutzbank Ted T Dunn Ronald R Farhang Janet J Uphoff Timothy S TS

Journal of clinical microbiology 20190130 2

Molecular methods offer superior sensitivity and specificity and reduce testing turnaround time from days to hours for detection of Bordetella pertussis and Bordetella parapertussis In this study, we evaluated the performance of the automated PCR-based Aries Bordetella Assay, which detects both B. pertussis and B. parapertussis directly from nasopharyngeal swab specimens. The limits of detection (LoDs) were 1,800 CFU·ml-1 for B. pertussis and ...[more]

PMID: 30518543

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundCyclosporine A (CsA) is used as a posttransplantation immunosuppressant drug, and careful monitoring of CsA concentration in whole blood is essential. A new automated electrochemiluminescence immunoassay (ECLIA) for CsA measurement has been assessed in a multicenter evaluation.MethodsResidual EDTA whole blood samples from patients undergoing CsA therapy after organ transplant were used in assay evaluation at 5 clinical laboratories in Europe. Experiments included imprecision according to CLSI EP5-A2 (within-run and intermediate), lower limit of quantification, linearity according to CLSI EP6-A, and recovery of commercial external quality control samples. In addition, comparisons to liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry methods in routine use at each investigational site and to commercial chemiluminescent microparticle immunoassay and antibody-conjugated magnetic immunoassay methods were performed.ResultsImprecision testing gave coefficients of variation of less than 9% in the 30-2000 mcg/L range for both within-run and intermediate imprecision. Lower limit of quantification of 6.8 mcg/L at one investigational site and 1.8 mcg/L at a second site at 20% coefficient of variation were observed. Linearity was measured over the concentration range 0-2000 mcg/L, yielding a deviation of less than ±12%. External quality control sample recovery by ECLIA was 93%-114% of LC-MS/MS sample recovery. Deming regression analysis of ECLIA method comparison to combined LC-MS/MS results yielded a slope of 1.04 [95% confidence interval (CI), 1.03-1.06] and intercept of 2.8 mcg/L (95% CI, 1.5-4.1 mcg/L). Comparison to chemiluminescent microparticle immunoassay yielded a slope of 0.87 (95% CI, 0.85-0.89) and intercept of 1.4 mcg/L (95% CI, -0.89 to 3.7 mcg/L); comparison to antibody-conjugated magnetic immunoassay yielded a slope of 0.96 (95% CI, 0.93-0.98) and intercept of -4.2 mcg/L (95% CI, -7.1 to -1.2 mcg/L).ConclusionsThe data from this multicenter evaluation indicate that the new ECLIA-based cyclosporine assay is fit for its purpose, the therapeutic monitoring of CsA.

Dataset Information

Multicenter Clinical Evaluation of the Automated Aries Bordetella Assay.

Publications

Multicenter Clinical Evaluation of the Automated Aries <i>Bordetella</i> Assay.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets