Vandendriessche Stien, Padalko Elizaveta, Wollants Elke, Verfaillie Charlotte, Verhasselt Bruno, Coorevits Liselotte
Department of Laboratory Medicine, Medical Microbiology, Ghent University Hospital , Ghent , Belgium.
Rega Institute, Laboratory of Clinical & Epidemiological Virology, Department of Microbiology and Immunology, KU Leuven , Leuven , Belgium.
Acta Clin Belg. 2019 Dec;74(6):379-385. doi: 10.1080/17843286.2018.1531605. Epub 2018 Oct 11.
The Seegene Allplex Respiratory panel was retrospectively challenged using a collection of quality control samples (QCMD) and clinical samples previously analysed with validated routine methods. A collection of 111 samples [43 QCMD samples, 13 bronchoalveolar lavage fluids and 55 nasopharyngeal aspirates/swabs] was tested with Seegene Allplex. The clinical samples were tested previously using either FTD® Respiratory Pathogens 21 qPCR assay (Fast Track Diagnostics), an in-house multiplex PCR for , or BioGX Sample-Ready Atypical pneumo panel (Becton Dickinson). Samples were stored at -80°C prior to analysis with Seegene Allplex™, nucleic acids were automatically extracted with NucliSENS Easymag (bioMérieux). Samples returning discordant results were subjected to repeat testing and/or additional testing by reference laboratories. Seegene correctly identified 41/43 QCMD samples (95.4%); two samples positive for respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) and human metapneumovirus, respectively, were only correctly identified following repeat testing. In the 56 clinical samples, overall, 97 pathogens were identified: 65 pathogens (67.0%) were detected both by routine methods and Seegene, 24 pathogens (24.7%) only by routine methods, and 8 pathogens (8.2%) only by Seegene. The majority of discordant results was detected in samples with low pathogen load (22/32, 68.8%) and in samples containing multiple pathogens (25/32, 78.1%). Full agreement between methods was observed for influenza, RSV, adenovirus, and . Discordance was observed for human metapneumovirus, coronavirus OC43, bocavirus and parainfluenza virus, mainly type 4. Overall, the Seegene Allplex assay performed well for routine detection of important respiratory targets. Acceptable agreement was observed between Seegene and other routine assays.
使用一组质量控制样本(QCMD)和先前用经过验证的常规方法分析过的临床样本,对Seegene Allplex呼吸道检测板进行回顾性验证。用Seegene Allplex检测了一组111个样本[43个QCMD样本、13份支气管肺泡灌洗液和55份鼻咽抽吸物/拭子]。这些临床样本先前使用FTD®呼吸道病原体21 qPCR检测法(快速诊断公司)、一种内部多重PCR法或BioGX样本即用型非典型肺炎检测板(贝克顿·迪金森公司)进行过检测。在用Seegene Allplex™分析之前,样本保存在-80°C,核酸用NucliSENS Easymag(生物梅里埃公司)自动提取。结果不一致的样本由参考实验室进行重复检测和/或额外检测。Seegene正确鉴定出41/43个QCMD样本(95.4%);分别对呼吸道合胞病毒(RSV)和人偏肺病毒呈阳性的两个样本,仅在重复检测后才被正确鉴定。在56个临床样本中,总共鉴定出97种病原体:65种病原体(67.0%)通过常规方法和Seegene均检测到,24种病原体(24.7%)仅通过常规方法检测到,8种病原体(8.2%)仅通过Seegene检测到。大多数不一致的结果出现在病原体载量低的样本(22/32,68.8%)和含有多种病原体的样本(25/32,78.1%)中。在流感、RSV、腺病毒和……方面,两种方法完全一致。在人偏肺病毒、冠状病毒OC43、博卡病毒和副流感病毒(主要是4型)方面观察到不一致。总体而言,Seegene Allplex检测法在重要呼吸道靶点的常规检测中表现良好。Seegene与其他常规检测方法之间观察到可接受的一致性。