Comparison of three multiplex PCR assays for detection of respiratory viruses: Anyplex II RV16, AdvanSure RV, and Real-Q RV

三种用于检测呼吸道病毒的多重PCR检测方法的比较:Anyplex II RV16、AdvanSure RV和Real-Q RV

阅读:1

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Due to its great sensitivity, the nucleic acid amplification test (NAAT) is widely used for detection of respiratory viruses (RV). However, few reports have described a direct comparison between multiplex RT-PCR assays for RV. The objective of this study was to perform a direct comparison of three multiplex RT-PCR assays for the detection of respiratory viruses. METHODS: A total of 201 respiratory samples (161 nasopharyngeal swab samples and 40 sputum samples) were tested with three commercial RV assays: Seegene Anyplex II RV16 (AP), LG AdvanSure RV (AD), and Biosewoom Real-Q RV (RQ). The additional tests for the discrepant results were conducted by repeat RV assay or monoplex PCR coupled direct sequencing. Data analysis using percent agreement, kappa, and prevalence-adjusted and bias-adjusted kappa (PABAK) values was performed for comparisons among the three RV assays. RESULTS: Of the 201 samples, AP, AD, and RQ detected 105 (52.2%), 99 (49.3%), and 95 (47.3%) positive cases respectively. The overall agreement, kappa, and PABAK values for the three assays ranged between 97%-98%, 0.76-0.86, and 0.93-0.96 respectively. The performance of the three assays was very similar, with 94%-100% agreement for all comparisons, each virus types. The additional testing of samples showed discrepant results demonstrating that AD assay had the highest rate of concordance with original results. CONCLUSIONS: We suggest that all multiplex assay would be suitable for the detection of for respiratory viruses in clinical setting.

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。