scholarly journals Evaluation of the Cepheid Xpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2 test for bronchoalveolar lavage

Author(s):  
Tung Phan ◽  
Ashley Mays ◽  
Melissa McCullough ◽  
Alan Wells

Accurate and rapid laboratory tests are essential for the prompt diagnosis of COVID-19, which is important to patients and infection control. The Xpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2 test is a real-time RT-PCR intended for the qualitative detection of nucleic acid from SARS-CoV-2 in upper respiratory specimens. In this study, we assessed the analytical and clinical performance characteristics of this rapid test for SARS-CoV-2 in 60 bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) specimens. BAL is a specimen type that is not authorized under EUA for the Xpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2 test. The limit of detection of the Xpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2 test was 500 copies/ml. The overall agreement of the Xpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2 test was 100%. The Xpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2 test is sensitive and specific to aid in diagnosis of COVID-19 using bronchoalveolar lavage.

2022 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tung Phan ◽  
Stephanie Boes ◽  
Melissa McCullough ◽  
Jamie Gribschaw ◽  
Alan Wells

A new SARS-CoV-2 Omicron (B.1.1.529) Variant of Concern has been emerging worldwide. We are seeing an unprecedented surge in patients due to Omicron in this COVID-19 pandemic. A rapid and accurate molecular test that effectively differentiates Omicron from other SARS-CoV-2 variants would be important for both epidemiologic value and for directing variant-specific therapies such as monoclonal antibody infusions. In this study, we developed a real-time RT-PCR assay for the qualitative detection of Omicron from routine clinical specimens sampling the upper respiratory tract. The limit of detection of the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant RT-PCR assay was 2 copies/μl. Notably, the assay did not show any cross-reactivity with other SARS-CoV-2 variants including Delta (B.1.617.2). This SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant RT-PCR laboratory-developed assay is sensitive and specific to detect Omicron in nasopharyngeal and nasal swab specimens.


2021 ◽  
Vol 156 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S9-S9
Author(s):  
Matthew M Hernandez ◽  
Radhika Banu ◽  
Paras Shrestha ◽  
Armi Patel ◽  
Feng Chen ◽  
...  

Abstract Background The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic has accelerated the need for rapid validation and implementation of assays for detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) in diagnostic specimens. Multiple molecular methods have received emergency use authorization by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for detection of SARS-CoV-2 in upper respiratory specimens, with testing of nasopharyngeal (NP) specimens serving as the foundation for these assays. However, supply chain constraints and the need for improved ease and safety of collection have prompted consideration of other specimen types as alternatives to NP specimens for detection of SARS-CoV-2. Here, we compared two methods for SARS-CoV-2 detection in saliva: the Roche cobas® 6800 SARS-CoV-2 real-time RT-PCR Test (“Roche”), which tests for viral ORF1ab (target 1, T1) and envelope E genes (target 2, T2); and the Agena Biosciences MassARRAY® SARS-CoV-2 Panel/MassARRAY® System (“Agena”), which tests for targets in the ORF1ab gene (ORF1, Orf1ab) and nucleocapsid N gene (N1, N2, N3). Methods Sixty saliva specimens collected within 48 hours of SARS-CoV-2 detection in an upper respiratory (anterior nares or NP) specimen from the same individual were tested in both the Roche and Agena platforms. Each system was evaluated for overall detection results and agreement with results of matched upper respiratory specimens. In addition, we determined the limit of detection (LoD) for each system and its component targets using an in-house SARS-CoV-2 standard generated from pooled positive saliva specimens quantitated against a commercially available standard (ZeptoMetrix NATSARS(COV2)-ERC). Results Both platforms demonstrated a similarly high sensitivity (97%) and specificity (100%) when compared to matched patient upper respiratory specimens and had high agreement with one another (Cohen’s κ = 0.9321, p = 2.6x10-13). Overall, the LoD (copies/mL) for the Roche assay was four times lower than that of Agena for saliva specimens (390.6 v. 1562.5). Furthermore, we determined that the LoD differed among the target components of each assay. The experimental LoD was comparable across Roche targets, but probit analyses indicate T2 has greater sensitivity (LoD: 228.6), Of the five Agena targets, the N2 target had the lowest LoD (1562.5). Conclusions In sum, we demonstrate that saliva is an acceptable specimen for testing in both the Roche cobas® 6800 SARS-CoV-2 real-time RT-PCR Test and the Agena Biosciences MassARRAY® SARS-CoV-2 Panel/MassARRAY® System, and both provide sensitive and specific detection of SARS-CoV-2 in saliva specimens. Although there was a high level of agreement between platforms, the LoD was lower for the Roche compared to the Agena assay with T2 and N2 being the most sensitive targets on each platform, respectively. The addition of saliva as an acceptable specimen and understanding the sensitivity for testing on these platforms can further inform public health measures for screening and detection to combat the pandemic.


2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (11) ◽  
Author(s):  
Gwynngelle A Borillo ◽  
Ron M Kagan ◽  
Russell E Baumann ◽  
Boris M Fainstein ◽  
Lamela Umaru ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Nucleic acid amplification testing is a critical tool for addressing the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic. Specimen pooling can increase throughput and conserve testing resources but requires validation to ensure that reduced sensitivity does not increase the false-negative rate. We evaluated the performance of a real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) test authorized by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for emergency use for pooled testing of upper respiratory specimens. Methods Positive specimens were selected from 3 prevalence groups, 1%–3%, >3%–6%, and >6%–10%. Positive percent agreement (PPA) was assessed by pooling single-positive specimens with 3 negative specimens; performance was assessed using Passing-Bablok regression. Additionally, we assessed the distributions of RT-PCR cycle threshold (Ct) values for 3091 positive specimens. Results PPA was 100% for the 101 pooled specimens. There was a linear relationship between Ct values for pooled and single-tested specimens (r = 0.96–0.99; slope ≈ 1). The mean pooled Ct shifts at 40 cycles were 2.38 and 1.90, respectively, for the N1 and N3 targets. The median Cts for 3091 positive specimens were 25.9 (N1) and 24.7 (N3). The percentage of positive specimens with Cts between 40 and the shifted Ct was 1.42% (N1) and 0.0% (N3). Conclusions Pooled and individual testing of specimens positive for SARS-CoV-2 demonstrated 100% agreement, which demonstrates the viability of pooled specimens for SARS-COV-2 testing using a dual-target RT-PCR system. Pooled specimen testing can help increase testing capacity for SARS-CoV-2 with a low risk of false-negative results.


PLoS ONE ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (6) ◽  
pp. e0252687
Author(s):  
Sukalyani Banik ◽  
Kaheerman Saibire ◽  
Shraddha Suryavanshi ◽  
Glenn Johns ◽  
Soumitesh Chakravorty ◽  
...  

Background Upper respiratory samples used to test for SARS-CoV-2 virus may be infectious and present a hazard during transport and testing. A buffer with the ability to inactivate SARS-CoV-2 at the time of sample collection could simplify and expand testing for COVID-19 to non-conventional settings. Methods We evaluated a guanidium thiocyanate-based buffer, eNAT™ (Copan) as a possible transport and inactivation medium for downstream Reverse Transcriptase-Polymerase Chain Reaction (RT-PCR) testing to detect SARS-CoV-2. Inactivation of SARS-CoV-2 USA-WA1/2020 in eNAT and in diluted saliva was studied at different incubation times. The stability of viral RNA in eNAT was also evaluated for up to 7 days at room temperature (28°C), refrigerated conditions (4°C) and at 35°C. Results SARS-COV-2 virus spiked directly in eNAT could be inactivated at >5.6 log10 PFU/ml within a minute of incubation. When saliva was diluted 1:1 in eNAT, no cytopathic effect (CPE) on VeroE6 cells was observed, although SARS-CoV-2 RNA could be detected even after 30 min incubation and after two cell culture passages. A 1:2 (saliva:eNAT) dilution abrogated both CPE and detectable viral RNA after as little as 5 min incubation in eNAT. SARS-CoV-2 RNA from virus spiked at 5X the limit of detection remained positive up to 7 days of incubation in all tested conditions. Conclusion eNAT and similar guanidinium thiocyanate-based media may be of value for transport, stabilization, and processing of clinical samples for RT-PCR based SARS-CoV-2 detection.


Diagnostics ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (12) ◽  
pp. 2300
Author(s):  
Saiful Arefeen Sazed ◽  
Mohammad Golam Kibria ◽  
Mohammad Sharif Hossain ◽  
Md Fahad Zamil ◽  
Pranob Chandra Adhikary ◽  
...  

Accurate diagnosis at the right moment is the prerequisite for treatment of any disease. Failure to correctly diagnose a disease can result in highly detrimental effects, unmistakably a crucial factor during the COVID-19 pandemic. RT-PCR is the gold standard for COVID-19 detection while there are other test procedures available, such as LAMP, X-Ray, and ELISA. However, these tests are expensive, require sophisticated equipment and a highly trained workforce, and multiple hours or even days are often required to obtain the test results. A rapid and cheap detection system can thus render a solution to the screening system on a larger scale and be added as an aid to the current detection processes. Recently, some rapid antigen-based COVID-19 tests devices have been developed and commercialized. In this study, we evaluated the clinical performance of a new rapid detection device (OnSite® COVID-19 Ag Rapid Test by CTK Biotech Inc., Poway, CA, USA) on COVID-19 symptomatic patients (n = 380). The overall sensitivity and specificity were 91.0% (95% CI: 84.8–95.3%) and 99.2% (95% CI: 97.1–99.9), against gold standard RT-PCR. The kit was capable of detecting patients even after 06 days of onset of symptoms and the sensitivity can be maximized to 98% in samples with an average RT-PCR Ct ≤ 26.48, demonstrating a high potential of the kit for clinical diagnosis of symptomatic patients in healthcare facilities.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Islam Hamed ◽  
Nesreen Shaban ◽  
Marwan Nassar ◽  
Sam Love ◽  
Martin D Curran ◽  
...  

Introduction Samples for diagnostic tests for SARS-CoV-2 can be obtained from the upper (nasopharyngeal/oropharyngeal swabs) or lower respiratory tract (sputum or tracheal aspirate or broncho-alveolar lavage - BAL). Data from different testing sites indicates different rates of positivity. Reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) allows for semi-quantitative estimates of viral load as time to crossing threshold (Ct) is inversely related to viral load. Objectives The objective of our study was to evaluate SARS-CoV2 RNA loads between paired nasopharyngeal (NP) and deep lung (endotracheal aspirate or BAL) samples from critically ill patients. Methods SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR results were retrospectively reviewed for 51 critically ill patients from 5 intensive care units in 3 hospitals ; Addenbrookes Hospital Cambridge (3 units), Royal Papworth Cambridge (1 unit), and Royal Sunderland Hospital (1 unit). At the times when paired NP and deep lung samples were obtained, one patient had been on oxygen only, 6 patients on non-invasive ventilation, 18 patients on ECMO, and 26 patients mechanically ventilated. Results Results collected showed significant gradient between NP and deep lung viral loads. Median Ct value was 29 for NP samples and 24 for deep lung samples. Of 51 paired samples, 16 were negative (below limit of detection) on NP swabs but positive (above limit of detection) on deep lung sample, whilst 2 were negative on deep sample but positive on NP (both patients were on ECMO). Conclusions It has been suggested that whilst SARS-CoV1 tends to replicate in the lower respiratory tract, SARS-CoV2 replicates more vigorously in the upper respiratory tract. These data challenge that assumption. These data suggest that viral migration to, and proliferation in, the lower respiratory tract may be a key factor in the progression to critical illness and the development of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS). Factors which promote this migration should be examined for association with severe COVID-19. From a practical point of view, patients with suspected severe COVID-19 should have virological samples obtained from the lower respiratory tract where-ever possible, as upper respiratory samples have a significant negative rate.


2020 ◽  
Vol 26 (10) ◽  
pp. 2469-2472
Author(s):  
So Yeon Kim ◽  
Jaehyeon Lee ◽  
Heungsup Sung ◽  
Hyukmin Lee ◽  
Myung Guk Han ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 54 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aldrich Ivan Lois D. Burog ◽  
Clarence Pio Rey C. Yacapin ◽  
Renee Rose O. Maglente ◽  
Anna Angelica Macalalad-Josue ◽  
Elenore Judy B. Uy ◽  
...  

KEY FINDINGS Current evidence does NOT support use of IgM/IgG rapid test kits for the definitive diagnosis of COVID-19 in currently symptomatic patients. • The present standard for diagnosis of COVID-19 is through qualitative detection of COVID-19 virus nucleic acid via reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR). • Due to long turnaround times and complicated logistical operations, a rapid and simple field test alternative is needed to diagnose and screen patients. • An alternative to the direct detection and measurement of viral load (RT-PCR) is the qualitative detection of specific antibodies to COVID-19. ELISA (discussed in a separate rapid review) and lateral flow immunoassay (LFIA) IgM/IgG rapid test kits are two currently available, qualitative, antibody tests for COVID-19. • Two low quality clinical trials showed that there is insufficient evidence to support the use of IgM/IgG rapid test kits for the definitive diagnosis of COVID-19. Diagnostic accuracy varies greatly depending on the timing of the test. The test performed very poorly during the early phase of the disease (i.e., less than eight days from onset of symptoms). • Existing guidelines do not recommend serologic antibody tests for the diagnosis of COVID-19 in currently symptomatic patients.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
letaief hejer ◽  
Sonia Dhaouadi ◽  
Aicha Hechaichi ◽  
Mouna Safer ◽  
Chahida Harizi ◽  
...  

Abstract Background COVID-19 pandemic is a massive global health emergency. Although RT-PCR is the gold standard for diagnosing suspected cases, there is a need of serological tests to investigate antibody responses. Many serologic immunoassays have been developed to detect antibodies to SARS-CoV2, including rapid tests. This study assessed the clinical performance of the SARS-CoV-2 antibody test (colloidal gold immunochromatography, LEPU TECHNOLOGY) and evaluated the kinetic antibody response in COVID-19 patients.Methods: Samples collected by finger stick; obtained from RT-PCR confirmed cases and samples of negative controls were tested with the IgM/IgG Detection Kit . Results: The kit shows a clinical sensitivity of 65.7 % [59.7%-71.3%] and a specificity of 96.3% [93.0%-98.3%]. The predictive positive value and negative predictive value were respectively 95.2% [91.0%-97.8%] and 71.4% [66.1%-76.2%]. The seroconversion of specific IgM and IgG antibodies were observed as early as the 2nd day after symptom onset.Conclusions: This test is quite useful for assessing previous virus exposure, although negative results may be unreliable during the first weeks after infection. Longitudinal studies on antibody responses during and post infection are needed.


Author(s):  
Ranawaka APM Perera ◽  
Eugene Tso ◽  
Owen TY Tsang ◽  
Dominic NC Tsang ◽  
Kitty Fung ◽  
...  

In 68 respiratory specimens from a cohort of 35 COVID-19 patients, 32 of them with mild disease, we found SARS coronavirus-2 virus culture and sub-genomic RNA was rarely detectable beyond 8 days after onset of illness although virus RNA by RT-PCR remained detectable for many weeks.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document