Browse
Submit Data
Databases
API
Help

Dataset Information

23 Views

0 Connections

0 Citations

0 Reanalyses

0 Downloads

Omics score: 0

Comparative Evaluation of Allplex Respiratory Panels 1, 2, 3, and BioFire FilmArray Respiratory Panel for the Detection of Respiratory Infections.

ABSTRACT: Multiplex nucleic acid amplification assays that simultaneously detect multiple respiratory pathogens in a single nasopharyngeal swab (NPS) specimen are widely used for rapid clinical diagnostics. We evaluated Allplex Respiratory Panel (RP) 1, 2, 3, and the BioFire FilmArray RP assay for detecting respiratory pathogens from NPS specimens. In all, 181 NPS specimens obtained from patients suspected of having respiratory infections during the non-influenza season (August-December 2019) were included. The Allplex RP 1, 2, and 3 detected 154 samples positive for respiratory viruses, whereas the BioFire FilmArray detected viruses in 98 samples. Co-infection with two or more viruses was detected in 41 and 17 NPS specimens by Allplex RP and the BioFire FilmArray RP, respectively. For adenoviruses, Allplex RP 1 detected 31 specimens, compared to 34 by the BioFire FilmArray. In all, 64 NPS specimens were positive for human enterovirus (HEV) and human rhinovirus (HRV) on the Allplex RP, in contrast to 39 HEV/HRV on the BioFire FilmArray. The parainfluenza virus (PIV-1-4) detection rate differed between the two systems. Most discrepant results were observed for NPS specimens with high cycle threshold values obtained by Allplex RP. This study showed concordant performance of the Allplex RP 1, 2, 3, and the BioFire FilmArray RP for the simultaneous detection of multiple respiratory viruses.

SUBMITTER: Lade H

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8775103 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Json Xml

Similar Datasets

Multicenter Evaluation of BioFire FilmArray Respiratory Panel 2 for Detection of Viruses and Bacteria in Nasopharyngeal Swab Samples.

Project description:The FilmArray Respiratory Panel 2 (RP2) is a multiplex in vitro diagnostic test for the simultaneous and rapid (?45-min) detection of 22 pathogens directly from nasopharyngeal swab (NPS) samples. It contains updated (and in some instances redesigned) assays that improve upon the FilmArray Respiratory Panel (RP; version 1.7), with a faster run time. The organisms identified are adenovirus, coronavirus 229E, coronavirus HKU1, coronavirus NL63, coronavirus OC43, human metapneumovirus, human rhinovirus/enterovirus, influenza virus A, influenza virus A H1, influenza virus A H1-2009, influenza virus A H3, influenza virus B, parainfluenza virus 1, parainfluenza virus 2, parainfluenza virus 3, parainfluenza virus 4, respiratory syncytial virus, Bordetella pertussis, Chlamydia pneumoniae, and Mycoplasma pneumoniae Two new targets are included in the FilmArray RP2: Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus and Bordetella parapertussis This study provides data from a multicenter evaluation of 1,612 prospectively collected NPS samples, with performance compared to that of the FilmArray RP or PCR and sequencing. The overall percent agreement between the FilmArray RP2 and the comparator testing was 99.2%. The RP2 demonstrated a positive percent agreement of 91.7% or greater for detection of all but three analytes: coronavirus OC43, B. parapertussis, and B. pertussis The FilmArray RP2 also demonstrated a negative percent agreement of ?93.8% for all analytes. Of note, the adenovirus assay detects all genotypes, with a demonstrated increase in sensitivity. The FilmArray RP2 represents a significant improvement over the FilmArray RP, with a substantially shorter run time that could aid in the diagnosis of respiratory infections in a variety of clinical scenarios.

| S-EPMC5971546 | biostudies-literature

Comparison of the Biofire FilmArray Respiratory Panel, Seegene AnyplexII RV16, and Argene for the detection of respiratory viruses.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Respiratory infections are common reasons for hospital admission, and are associated with enormous economic burden due to significant morbidity and mortality. The wide spectrum of microbial agents underlying the pathology renders the diagnosis of respiratory infections challenging. Molecular diagnostics offer an advantage to the current serological and culture-based methods in terms of sensitivity, coverage, hands-on time, and time to results. OBJECTIVES:This study aimed to compare the clinical performance of three commercial kits for respiratory viral detection. STUDY DESIGN:The performance of FilmArray Respiratory Panel, AnyplexII RV16, and Argene was compared using clinical respiratory samples (n?=?224, comprising 189 nasopharyngeal swabs in Universal Transport Medium (UTM) and 35 endotracheal aspirates), based on common overlapping targets across the platforms. Influenza A "equivocal" and "no-subtype" samples by FilmArray were further compared to a laboratory-developed Influenza A/B test. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS:The overall performance of all three platforms appeared to be comparable with regards to sensitivities (95.8-97.9%) and specificities (96.1-98.0%), detection of coinfections, and distinguishment of influenza from non-influenza cases. "Equivocal" and "no-subtype" samples by FilmArray mostly represented weak Influenza A by laboratory-developed test. Lower respiratory tract samples had comparable final-run success-rates and discordant-rates as compared to UTM. Coronavirus HKU1, which was not targeted by AnyplexII RV16, were detected as OC43. The expected test volume would be the main determinant for the selection of platform. Among the platforms, the FilmArray is the most automated but is of the lowest-throughput and has the highest reagent cost.

| S-EPMC7185839 | biostudies-literature

Real-life Assessment of BioFire FilmArray Pneumonia Panel in Adults Hospitalized With Respiratory Illness.

Project description:BackgroundInability to identify the microbial etiology of lower respiratory tract infection leads to unnecessary antibiotic use. We evaluated the utility of the BioFire FilmArray Pneumonia Panel (BioFire PN) to inform microbiologic diagnosis.MethodsHospitalized adults with respiratory illness were recruited; sputa and clinical/laboratory data were collected. Sputa were cultured for bacteria and tested with BioFire PN. Microbial etiology was adjudicated by 4 physicians. Bacterial polymerase chain reaction (PCR) was compared with culture and clinical adjudication.ResultsOf 298 sputa tested, BioFire PN detected significantly more pathogens (350 bacteria, 16 atypicals, and 164 viruses) than sputum culture plus any standard-of-care testing (91% vs 60%, P < .0001). When compared with culture, the sensitivity of BioFire PN for individual bacteria was 46% to 100%; specificity, 61% to 100%; and negative predictive value, 92% to 100%. Cases were adjudicated as viral (n = 58) and bacterial (n = 100). PCR detected bacteria in 55% of viral cases and 95% of bacterial (P < .0001). High serum procalcitonin and bacterial adjudication were more often associated with sputa with 106 or 107 copies detected.ConclusionsMultiplex PCR testing of sputa for bacteria is useful to rule out bacterial infection with added value to detect viruses and atypical bacteria.

| S-EPMC10786250 | biostudies-literature

Day at the Races: Comparing BioFire FilmArray Blood Culture ID Panels With Verigene Blood Culture Panel in Gram-Negative Bloodstream Infections Using DOOR-MAT Analysis.

Project description:Three rapid diagnostic test panels (Verigene BC-GN, BioFire BCID, and BCID 2 [RUO]) were compared using the Desirability of Outcome Ranking Management of Antimicrobial Therapy (DOOR-MAT) to evaluate potential downstream antimicrobial prescribing decisions resulting from the panels' different organism and resistance detection. BioFire BCID 2 (RUO) had the best mean DOOR-MAT scores.

| S-EPMC8442774 | biostudies-literature

Multicenter Evaluation of BioFire FilmArray Meningitis/Encephalitis Panel for Detection of Bacteria, Viruses, and Yeast in Cerebrospinal Fluid Specimens.

Project description:Rapid diagnosis and treatment of infectious meningitis and encephalitis are critical to minimize morbidity and mortality. Comprehensive testing of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) often includes Gram stain, culture, antigen detection, and molecular methods, paired with chemical and cellular analyses. These methods may lack sensitivity or specificity, can take several days, and require significant volume for complete analysis. The FilmArray Meningitis/Encephalitis (ME) Panel is a multiplexed in vitro diagnostic test for the simultaneous, rapid (?1-h) detection of 14 pathogens directly from CSF specimens: Escherichia coli K1, Haemophilus influenzae, Listeria monocytogenes, Neisseria meningitidis, Streptococcus pneumoniae, Streptococcus agalactiae, cytomegalovirus, enterovirus, herpes simplex virus 1 and 2, human herpesvirus 6, human parechovirus, varicella-zoster virus, and Cryptococcus neoformans/Cryptococcus gattii We describe a multicenter evaluation of 1,560 prospectively collected CSF specimens with performance compared to culture (bacterial analytes) and PCR (all other analytes). The FilmArray ME Panel demonstrated a sensitivity or positive percentage of agreement of 100% for 9 of 14 analytes. Enterovirus and human herpesvirus type 6 had agreements of 95.7% and 85.7%, and L. monocytogenes and N. meningitidis were not observed in the study. For S. agalactiae, there was a single false-positive and false-negative result each, for a sensitivity and specificity of 0 and 99.9%, respectively. The specificity or negative percentage of agreement was 99.2% or greater for all other analytes. The FilmArray ME Panel is a sensitive and specific test to aid in diagnosis of ME. With use of this comprehensive and rapid test, improved patient outcomes and antimicrobial stewardship are anticipated.

| S-EPMC5005480 | biostudies-literature

Impact of BioFire FilmArray respiratory panel results on antibiotic days of therapy in different clinical settings.

Project description:ObjectiveThe BioFire FilmArray Respiratory Panel (RFA) has been proposed as a tool that can aid in the timely diagnosis and treatment of respiratory tract infections but its effect on antibiotic prescribing among adult patients has varied. We evaluated the impact of RFA result on antibiotic days of therapy (DOTs) in 2 distinct cohorts: hospitalized patients and patients discharged from the emergency department (ED).DesignRetrospective cohort study.SettingThe study was conducted in 3 community hospitals in Des Moines, Iowa, from March 3 to March 16, 2019.PatientsAdults aged >18 years.MethodsPotential outcome means and average treatment effects for RFA results on antibiotic DOTs were estimated. Inverse probability of treatment weighting with regression adjustment was used.ResultsWe identified 243 patients each in the hospitalized and ED-discharged cohorts. Among hospitalized patients, RFA results did not affect antibiotic DOTs. Among patients discharged from the ED, we found that if all patients had had influenza detected, the average DOTs would have been 2.3 DOTs (-3.2 to -1.4) less than the average observed if all the patients had had a negative RFA (P < .0001); no differences in DOTs were observed when comparing an RFA with a noninfluenza virus detected compared to an RFA with negative results.ConclusionsThe impact of RFA results on antibiotic DOTs varies by clinical setting, and reductions were observed only among patients discharged from the ED who had influenza A or B detected.

| S-EPMC9495546 | biostudies-literature

BioFire<sup>®</sup> FilmArray<sup>®</sup> Pneumonia Panel for Severe Lower Respiratory Tract Infections: Subgroup Analysis of a Randomized Clinical Trial.

Project description:IntroductionThe epidemiology of severe lower respiratory tract infections (LRTI) is constantly changing. We aimed to describe it using the BioFire® FilmArray® Pneumonia plus (PNplus) Panel.MethodsIn a sub-study of the PROGRESS trial, sputum samples of 90 patients with sepsis and LRTI were retrospectively studied. The primary endpoint was the comparative detection rate of pathogens between conventional microbiology and PNplus Panel; secondary endpoints were microbiology and the association with the inflammatory host response.ResultsFifty-six patients with community-acquired pneumonia without risk factors for multidrug-resistant (MDR) pathogens and another 34 patients with risk factors for MDR were studied; median pneumonia severity index (PSI) was 113 (88-135). PNplus detection rate was 72.2% compared to 10% by conventional microbiology (p < 0.001); Streptococcus pneumoniae was the most common pathogen. PSI and procalcitonin were greater among patients with bacterial pathogens than viral pathogens. Median procalcitonin was 0.49 ng/ml and 0.18 ng/ml among patients with ≥ 105 and < 105 copies/ml of detected bacteria, respectively (p = 0.004). Resistance reached 14.4%.ConclusionPNplus detects severe pneumonia pathogens at a greater rate than conventional microbiology. High levels of inflammation accompany bacterial detection.Trial registrationPROGRESS, ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03333304, 06/11/2017.

| S-EPMC8197784 | biostudies-literature

Clinical evaluation of the BioFire® Respiratory Panel 2.1 and detection of SARS-CoV-2.

Project description:We evaluated the performance of the BioFire® Respiratory Panel 2.1 (RP2.1) in the detection of SARS CoV-2 in comparison against three other SARS CoV-2 EUA assays. In these studies, the RP2.1 panel had 98 % positive percent agreement (48/49) and 100 % negative percent agreement (49/49). Since 30 % of nasopharyngeal swab specimens have a SARS CoV-2 Ct >30 and thus detection of virus in low titers is clinically relevant, a sample with a high titer was diluted and each 10 fold dilution was tested in triplicate and compared against 6 other EUA approved SARS CoV-2 assays. These data suggested that the BioFire® RP2.1 panel, along with four other SARS CoV-2 assays (Roche cobas, Cepheid Xpert Xpress, BioFire® Defense COVID19, and NECoV19), consistently detected viral RNA at the 10-7 dilution. Overall, these studies suggest that the BioFire® RP2.1 assay can be used to detect acute cases of SARS CoV2 in addition to patients with low viral titer later in disease presentation.

| S-EPMC7336953 | biostudies-literature

Project description:PurposePanel PCR tests provide rapid pathogen identification. However, their diagnostic performance is unclear. We assessed the performance of the Biofire© FilmArray pneumonia (PN)-panel against standard culture in broncho-alveolar lavage (BAL) samples.MethodsSetting: University Hospital Basel (February 2019 to July 2020), including hospitalized patients with a BAL (± pneumonia). We determined sensitivity and specificity of the PN-panel against standard culture. Using univariate logistic regression, we calculated odds ratios (OR) for pneumonia according to PN-panel and culture status, stratifying by chronic pulmonary disease. We calculated ORs for pneumonia for different pathogens to estimate the clinical relevance.ResultsWe included 840 adult patients, 60% were males, median age was 68 years, 35% had chronic pulmonary disease, 21% had pneumonia, and 36% had recent antibiotic use. In 1078 BAL samples, bacterial pathogens were detected in 36% and 16% with PN-panel and culture, respectively. The overall sensitivity and specificity of the PN-panel was high, whereas the positive predictive value was low. The OR of pneumonia was 1.1 (95% CI 0.7-1.6) for PN-panel-positive only; 2.6 (95% CI 1.3-5.3) for culture-positive only, and 1.6 (95% CI 1.0-2.4) for PN-panel and culture-positive. The detection rate of Haemophilus influenzae, Staphylococcus aureus, and Moraxella catarrhalis in the PN-panel was high but not associated with pneumonia.ConclusionWhile sensitivity and specificity of PN-panel are high compared to culture, pathogen detection did not correlate well with a pneumonia diagnosis. Patients with culture-positive BAL had the highest OR for pneumonia-thus the impact of the PN-panel on clinical management needs further evaluation in randomized controlled trials.

| S-EPMC10810975 | biostudies-literature

Evaluation of the BioFire® FilmArray® Meningitis/Encephalitis panel in an adult and pediatric Ugandan population.

Project description:BackgroundMeningitis causes significant mortality in sub-Saharan Africa and limited diagnostics exist. We evaluated the utility of the BioFire® FilmArray® Meningitis/Encephalitis multiplex PCR panel (BioFire ME) in HIV-infected adults and HIV-infected and uninfected children presenting with suspected meningitis in Uganda.MethodsWe tested cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) using a stepwise meningitis diagnostic algorithm including BioFire ME. We determined the diagnostic performance of BioFire ME for cryptococcal meningitis, using cryptococcal antigen (CrAg) and CSF culture as reference standards, and assessed other central nervous system (CNS) pathogens identified by the panel.ResultsWe evaluated 328 adult and 42 pediatric CSF specimens using BioFire ME. Of the adult CSF samples tested, 258 were obtained at baseline, and 70 were obtained from repeat lumbar punctures in cryptococcal meningitis. For Cryptococcus, sensitivity was 82%, specificity was 98%, PPV was 98%, and NPV was 79% in baseline specimens using CSF CrAg as the reference standard. Among follow-up specimens, a negative BioFire ME for Cryptococcus predicted CSF culture sterility with 84% NPV. Overall sensitivity was decreased at low fungal burdens: 29% for 0-99 Cryptococcus CFU/mL compared to 94% for ≥100 CFU/mL in baseline specimens. Other pathogens detected included E. Coli, H. influenzae, S. pneumoniae, CMV, enterovirus, HSV, HHV-6, and VZV. Two specimens tested positive for S. pneumoniae and one for Cryptococcus in the pediatric population.ConclusionsMultiplex PCR is a promising rapid diagnostic test for meningitis in adults and children in resource-limited settings. Cryptococcus at low fungal burdens in CSF may be missed by BioFire ME.

| S-EPMC9983612 | biostudies-literature

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

OmicsDI is an Elixir interoperability service. Learn more ›

Tweets

OmicsDI Databases

PRIDE
PeptideAtlas
MassIVE
JPOST Repository
Physiome Model Repository

EGA
EVA
ENA
LINCS
PAXDB
Cell Collective

MetaboLights
Metabolomics Workbench
MetabolomeExpress
GNPS
BioModels
FAIRDOMHub

ArrayExpress
dbGaP
ExpressionAtlas
GEO
NODE

Information

Databases
Help
API
Contact us
Code on GitHub
Terms of use
Submit Data