Suppr超能文献

评价三种用于检测上呼吸道样本中 SARS-CoV-2 的商业分子检测方法。

Evaluation of three commercial assays for SARS-CoV-2 molecular detection in upper respiratory tract samples.

机构信息

Dipartimento di Scienze Biotecnologiche di Base, Cliniche Intensivologiche e Perioperatorie, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy.

Dipartimento di Scienze di Laboratorio e Infettivologiche, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy.

出版信息

Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 2021 Feb;40(2):269-277. doi: 10.1007/s10096-020-04025-0. Epub 2020 Sep 4.

Abstract

The increasing COVID-19 widespread has created the necessity to assess the diagnostic accuracy of newly introduced (RT-PCR based) assays for SARS-CoV-2 RNA detection in respiratory tract samples. We compared the results of the Allplex™ 2019-nCoV assay with those of the Simplexa™ COVID-19 Direct assay and the Quanty COVID-19 assay, respectively, all performed on 125 nasal/oropharyngeal swab samples of patients with COVID-19 suspicion. Fifty-four samples were positive, and 71 were negative with the Allplex™ assay, whereas 47 of 54 samples were also positive with the Simplexa™ assay. The Quanty assay detected 55 positive samples, including the 54 positive samples with the Allplex™ assay and 1 sample that was Allplex™ negative but Simplexa™ positive. Using a consensus result criterion as the reference standard allowed to resolve the eight samples with discordant results (one Allplex™ negative and seven Simplexa™ negative) as truly false negative. Interestingly, a Spearman's negative association was found between the viral RNA loads quantified by the Quanty assay and the C values of RT PCRs performed with either the Allplex™ assay or the Simplexa™ assay. However, the strength of this association was higher for the Allplex™ assay (N gene, ρ = - 0.92; RdRP gene, ρ = - 0.91) than for the Simplexa™ assay (ORF1ab gene, ρ = - 0.65; S gene, ρ = - 0.80). The Allplex™ 2019-nCoV, the Simplexa™ COVID-19 Direct, and the Quanty COVID-19 assays yielded comparable results. However, the role these assays might play in future clinical practice warrants larger comparison studies.

摘要

新型冠状病毒(SARS-CoV-2)的不断传播,促使我们需要评估新引入的基于 RT-PCR 的呼吸道样本中 SARS-CoV-2 RNA 检测方法的诊断准确性。我们比较了 Allplex™ 2019-nCoV 检测法、Simplexa™ COVID-19 Direct 检测法和 Quanty COVID-19 检测法的结果,这三种方法均对 125 例疑似 COVID-19 患者的鼻/咽拭子样本进行了检测。Allplex™ 检测法的结果显示,54 个样本为阳性,71 个样本为阴性,而 Simplexa™ 检测法显示,这 54 个阳性样本中有 47 个也是阳性。Quanty 检测法检测到 55 个阳性样本,包括 Allplex™ 检测法的 54 个阳性样本和 1 个 Allplex™ 阴性但 Simplexa™ 阳性的样本。使用共识结果标准作为参考标准,可以解决 8 个结果不一致的样本(1 个 Allplex™ 阴性和 7 个 Simplexa™ 阴性),这些样本被认为是真正的假阴性。有趣的是,Quanty 检测法定量的病毒 RNA 载量与 Allplex™ 检测法或 Simplexa™ 检测法进行的 RT-PCR 的 C 值之间存在显著的负相关。然而,这种相关性在 Allplex™ 检测法(N 基因,ρ=−0.92;RdRP 基因,ρ=−0.91)中比在 Simplexa™ 检测法(ORF1ab 基因,ρ=−0.65;S 基因,ρ=−0.80)中更强。Allplex™ 2019-nCoV、Simplexa™ COVID-19 Direct 和 Quanty COVID-19 检测法的结果具有可比性。然而,这些检测法在未来临床实践中可能发挥的作用需要更大的比较研究来验证。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/1cc3/7817555/57a05f1f5534/10096_2020_4025_Fig1_HTML.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验