Clinical performance of the 3M Rapid Detection Flu A+B Test compared to R-Mix culture, DFA and BinaxNOW Influenza A&B Test

2009 ◽  
Vol 45 (2) ◽  
pp. 146-149 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christine C. Ginocchio ◽  
Madhavi Lotlikar ◽  
Leon Falk ◽  
Suman Arora ◽  
Margaret Kowerska ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rapid Detection ◽  
Influenza A ◽  
Clinical Performance ◽  
B Test

Development of an antigen-ELISA and a colloidal gold–based immunochromatographic strip based on monoclonal antibodies for detection of avian influenza A(H5) viruses

2021 ◽  
pp. 104063872110275
Author(s):  
Yixin Xiao ◽  
Fan Yang ◽  
Fumin Liu ◽  
Linfang Cheng ◽  
Hangping Yao ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Avian Influenza ◽  
Disease Virus ◽  
Colloidal Gold ◽  
Rapid Detection ◽  
Influenza A ◽  
Field Investigation ◽  
Cross Reactivity ◽  
Detection Methods ◽  
Immunochromatographic Strip ◽  
Antigen Elisa

Avian influenza A(H5) viruses (avian IAVs) pose a major threat to the economy and public health. We developed an antigen-ELISA (ag-ELISA) and a colloidal gold–based immunochromatographic strip for the rapid detection of avian A(H5) viruses. Both detection methods displayed no cross-reactivity with other viruses (e.g., other avian IAVs, infectious bursal disease virus, Newcastle disease virus, infectious bronchitis virus, avian paramyxovirus). The ag-ELISA was sensitive down to 0.5 hemagglutinin (HA) units/100 µL of avian A(H5) viruses and 7.5 ng/mL of purified H5 HA proteins. The immunochromatographic strip was sensitive down to 1 HA unit/100 µL of avian A(H5) viruses. Both detection methods exhibited good reproducibility with CVs < 10%. For 200 random poultry samples, the sensitivity and specificity of the ag-ELISA were 92.6% and 98.8%, respectively, and for test strips were 88.9% and 98.3%, respectively. Both detection methods displayed high specificity, sensitivity, and stability, making them suitable for rapid detection and field investigation of avian A(H5) viruses.

scholarly journals Performance of BioFire array or QuickVue influenza A + B test versus a validation qPCR assay for detection of influenza A during a volunteer A/California/2009/H1N1 challenge study

2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
David R. McIlwain ◽  
Han Chen ◽  
Maria Apkarian ◽  
Melton Affrime ◽  
Bonnie Bock ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Influenza A ◽  
Rapid Test ◽  
Influenza Viruses ◽  
Qpcr Assay ◽  
Superior Performance ◽  
Qrt Pcr ◽  
Challenge Study ◽  
Test Kit ◽  
2009 H1n1 ◽  
B Test

Abstract Background Influenza places a significant burden on global health and economics. Individual case management and public health efforts to mitigate the spread of influenza are both strongly impacted by our ability to accurately and efficiently detect influenza viruses in clinical samples. Therefore, it is important to understand the performance characteristics of available assays to detect influenza in a variety of settings. We provide the first report of relative performance between two products marketed to streamline detection of influenza virus in the context of a highly controlled volunteer influenza challenge study. Methods Nasopharyngeal swab samples were collected during a controlled A/California/2009/H1N1 influenza challenge study and analyzed for detection of virus shedding using a validated qRT-PCR (qPCR) assay, a sample-to-answer qRT-PCR device (BioMerieux BioFire FilmArray RP), and an immunoassay based rapid test kit (Quidel QuickVue Influenza A + B Test). Results Relative to qPCR, the sensitivity and specificity of the BioFire assay was 72.1% [63.7–79.5%, 95% confidence interval (CI)] and 93.5% (89.3–96.4%, 95% CI) respectively. For the QuickVue rapid test the sensitivity was 8.5% (4.8–13.7%, 95% CI) and specificity was 99.2% (95.6–100%, 95% CI). Conclusion Relative to qPCR, the BioFire assay had superior performance compared to rapid test in the context of a controlled influenza challenge study.

scholarly journals Correction to: Performance of BioFire array or QuickVue influenza A + B test versus a validation qPCR assay for detection of influenza A during a volunteer A/California/2009/H1N1 challenge study

2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
David R. McIlwain ◽  
Han Chen ◽  
Maria Apkarian ◽  
Melton Affrime ◽  
Bonnie Bock ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Influenza A ◽  
Qpcr Assay ◽  
Challenge Study ◽  
2009 H1n1 ◽  
B Test

An amendment to this paper has been published and can be accessed via the original article.

3M™ Rapid Detection Flu A + B Test

2009 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 15-18 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joan Paulson
Keyword(s):  
Rapid Detection ◽  
B Test

scholarly journals Performance of the Molecular Alere i Influenza A&B Test Compared to That of the Xpert Flu A/B Assay

2014 ◽  
Vol 53 (2) ◽  
pp. 706-709 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kimberle C. Chapin ◽  
Estefany J. Flores-Cortez
Keyword(s):  
Influenza Virus ◽  
Sensitivity And Specificity ◽  
Influenza A ◽  
Point Of Care ◽  
Type A ◽  
Influenza B ◽  
Clinical Sensitivity ◽  
Transport Medium ◽  
The Poor ◽  
B Test

Data on the performance of rapid molecular point-of-care use platforms for diagnosis of influenza are lacking. We validated nasopharyngeal (NP) flocked specimens in universal transport medium (UTM) and evaluated the clinical sensitivity and specificity of the Alere i influenza A&B test compared to those of the Xpert flu A/B assay. The Alere i influenza A&B test had an overall sensitivity and specificity of 93.8% and 62.5% for influenza A, respectively, and of 91.8% and 53.6% for influenza B, respectively. The poor specificity was due to influenza virus samples determined positive for both type A and B.

scholarly journals Automated multiplex nucleic acid tests for rapid detection of SARS-CoV-2, influenza A and B infection with direct reverse-transcription quantitative PCR (dirRT-qPCR) assay in a centrifugal microfluidic platform

RSC Advances ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (56) ◽  
pp. 34088-34098
Author(s):  
Minghui Ji ◽  
Yun Xia ◽  
Jacky Fong-Chuen Loo ◽  
Lang Li ◽  
Ho-Pui Ho ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Nucleic Acid ◽  
Quantitative Pcr ◽  
Reverse Transcription ◽  
Rapid Detection ◽  
Influenza A ◽  
Qpcr Assay ◽  
Multiplex Detection ◽  
Microfluidic Platform ◽  
Reverse Transcription Quantitative Pcr ◽  
Nucleic Acid Tests

Development of a microfluidic disc-direct reverse-transcription quantitative PCR platform to perform automated multiplex nucleic acid tests for rapid multiplex detection of disease infection.

scholarly journals Rapid Detection of Influenza A Infection in a Children's Hospital

1999 ◽  
Vol 45 (4, Part 2 of 2) ◽  
pp. 169A-169A
Author(s):  
Daniel E Noyola ◽  
Gail J Demmler
Keyword(s):  
Rapid Detection ◽  
Influenza A ◽  
Children's Hospital ◽  
Children’S Hospital
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document