• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

罗氏和罗氏 Lumipulse 定量 SARS-CoV-2 抗原检测系统用于 COVID-19 诊断的性能比较。

Comparison of Roche and Lumipulse quantitative SARS-CoV-2 antigen test performance using automated systems for the diagnosis of COVID-19.

机构信息

Genome Analysis Center, Yamanashi Central Hospital, 1-1-1 Fujimi, Kofu, Yamanashi, Japan.

Division of Clinical Biochemistry and Immunology, Yamanashi Central Hospital, 1-1-1 Fujimi, Kofu, Yamanashi, Japan.

出版信息

Int J Infect Dis. 2021 Jul;108:263-269. doi: 10.1016/j.ijid.2021.05.067. Epub 2021 Jun 1.

DOI:10.1016/j.ijid.2021.05.067
PMID:34082089
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8166457/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) continues to spread worldwide. Here, we evaluated the performance of two quantitative antigen (Ag) tests, the Roche and Lumipulse Ag tests, using automated platforms.

METHODS

We collected 637 nasopharyngeal swab samples from 274 individuals. Samples were subjected to quantitative reverse transcription PCR (RT-qPCR), the Roche Ag test and Lumipulse Ag test.

RESULTS

When RT-qPCR was used as a reference, the overall concordance rate of the Roche Ag test was 77.1% (491/637) with 70.0% (341/487) sensitivity and 100% specificity (150/150). When inconclusive results of the Lumipulse Ag test were excluded, the overall concordance rate of the Lumipulse Ag test was 88.3% (467/529) with 84.8% (330/389) sensitivity and 97.9% (137/140) specificity. The overall concordance rate between the Roche and Lumipulse Ag tests was 97.9% (518/529) with 96.7% (322/333) sensitivity and 100% (196/196) specificity. Quantitative Ag levels determined using the Roche and Lumipulse Ag tests were highly correlated (R = 0.922). The Roche and Lumipulse Ag tests showed high concordance up to nine days after symptom onset, with progressively lower concordance after that.

CONCLUSIONS

The Roche and Lumipulse Ag tests showed equivalent assay performance and represent promising approaches for diagnosing coronavirus disease 2019.

摘要

背景

严重急性呼吸综合征冠状病毒 2(SARS-CoV-2)继续在全球范围内传播。在此,我们评估了两种定量抗原(Ag)检测罗氏和 Lumipulse Ag 检测的性能,这些检测使用自动化平台进行。

方法

我们收集了 274 名个体的 637 份鼻咽拭子样本。对样本进行定量逆转录 PCR(RT-qPCR)、罗氏 Ag 检测和 Lumipulse Ag 检测。

结果

当 RT-qPCR 作为参考时,罗氏 Ag 检测的总符合率为 77.1%(491/637),敏感性为 70.0%(341/487),特异性为 100%(150/150)。当排除 Lumipulse Ag 检测的不确定结果时,Lumipulse Ag 检测的总符合率为 88.3%(467/529),敏感性为 84.8%(330/389),特异性为 97.9%(137/140)。罗氏和 Lumipulse Ag 检测之间的总符合率为 97.9%(518/529),敏感性为 96.7%(322/333),特异性为 100%(196/196)。罗氏和 Lumipulse Ag 检测确定的定量 Ag 水平高度相关(R = 0.922)。罗氏和 Lumipulse Ag 检测在症状出现后 9 天内具有高度一致性,此后一致性逐渐降低。

结论

罗氏和 Lumipulse Ag 检测具有等效的检测性能,是诊断 2019 年冠状病毒病的有前途的方法。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/642f/8166457/c524aacc07cc/gr2_lrg.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/642f/8166457/4e1ee7c5f0c1/gr1_lrg.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/642f/8166457/c524aacc07cc/gr2_lrg.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/642f/8166457/4e1ee7c5f0c1/gr1_lrg.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/642f/8166457/c524aacc07cc/gr2_lrg.jpg

相似文献

1
Comparison of Roche and Lumipulse quantitative SARS-CoV-2 antigen test performance using automated systems for the diagnosis of COVID-19.罗氏和罗氏 Lumipulse 定量 SARS-CoV-2 抗原检测系统用于 COVID-19 诊断的性能比较。
Int J Infect Dis. 2021 Jul;108:263-269. doi: 10.1016/j.ijid.2021.05.067. Epub 2021 Jun 1.
2
Prospective study of 1308 nasopharyngeal swabs from 1033 patients using the LUMIPULSE SARS-CoV-2 antigen test: Comparison with RT-qPCR.1033 例患者 1308 份鼻咽拭子的前瞻性研究:LUMIPULSE SARS-CoV-2 抗原检测与 RT-qPCR 的比较。
Int J Infect Dis. 2021 Apr;105:7-14. doi: 10.1016/j.ijid.2021.02.005. Epub 2021 Feb 5.
3
Comparison of automated SARS-CoV-2 antigen test for COVID-19 infection with quantitative RT-PCR using 313 nasopharyngeal swabs, including from seven serially followed patients.比较 313 例鼻咽拭子(包括 7 例连续随访患者)的自动化 SARS-CoV-2 抗原检测与定量 RT-PCR 对 COVID-19 感染的检测结果。
Int J Infect Dis. 2020 Oct;99:397-402. doi: 10.1016/j.ijid.2020.08.029. Epub 2020 Aug 12.
4
Evaluation of Lumipulse® G SARS-CoV-2 antigen assay automated test for detecting SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid protein (NP) in nasopharyngeal swabs for community and population screening.Lumipulse® G SARS-CoV-2抗原检测法用于社区和人群筛查中检测鼻咽拭子中SARS-CoV-2核衣壳蛋白(NP)的自动化检测评估。
Int J Infect Dis. 2021 Apr;105:391-396. doi: 10.1016/j.ijid.2021.02.098. Epub 2021 Feb 26.
5
Comparison of Allplex™ SARS-CoV-2 Assay, Easy SARS-CoV-2 WE and Lumipulse quantitative SARS-CoV-2 antigen test performance using automated systems for the diagnosis of COVID-19.采用自动化系统比较 Allplex™ SARS-CoV-2 检测试剂盒、Easy SARS-CoV-2 WE 检测试剂盒和 Lumipulse 定量 SARS-CoV-2 抗原检测试剂盒在 COVID-19 诊断中的性能。
Int J Infect Dis. 2021 Dec;113:113-115. doi: 10.1016/j.ijid.2021.09.069. Epub 2021 Sep 29.
6
Comparison of four commercial, automated antigen tests to detect SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern.比较四种商业化的自动化抗原检测试剂对检测 SARS-CoV-2 关注变异株的效果。
Med Microbiol Immunol. 2021 Dec;210(5-6):263-275. doi: 10.1007/s00430-021-00719-0. Epub 2021 Aug 20.
7
Lumipulse G SARS-CoV-2 Ag assay evaluation using clinical samples from different testing groups.使用来自不同检测组的临床样本对 Lumipulse G SARS-CoV-2 Ag 检测试剂盒进行评估。
Clin Chem Lab Med. 2021 Apr 7;59(8):1468-1476. doi: 10.1515/cclm-2021-0182. Print 2021 Jul 27.
8
Evaluating the field performance of multiple SARS-Cov-2 antigen rapid tests using nasopharyngeal swab samples.评估使用鼻咽拭子样本的多种 SARS-CoV-2 抗原快速检测的现场性能。
PLoS One. 2022 Feb 14;17(2):e0262399. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0262399. eCollection 2022.
9
Evaluation of a chemiluminescent enzyme immunoassay-based high-throughput SARS-CoV-2 antigen assay for the diagnosis of COVID-19: The VITROS® SARS-CoV-2 Antigen Test.基于化学发光酶免疫分析的高通量 SARS-CoV-2 抗原检测试剂盒用于 COVID-19 诊断的评估:VITROS® SARS-CoV-2 抗原检测试剂盒。
J Med Virol. 2021 Dec;93(12):6778-6781. doi: 10.1002/jmv.27153. Epub 2021 Aug 12.
10
Clinical validation of quantitative SARS-CoV-2 antigen assays to estimate SARS-CoV-2 viral loads in nasopharyngeal swabs.临床验证定量 SARS-CoV-2 抗原检测法以估计鼻咽拭子中的 SARS-CoV-2 病毒载量。
J Infect Chemother. 2021 Apr;27(4):613-616. doi: 10.1016/j.jiac.2020.11.021. Epub 2020 Dec 3.

引用本文的文献

1
Evolution of the newest diagnostic methods for COVID-19: a Chinese perspective.新冠病毒最新诊断方法的演变:中国视角。
J Zhejiang Univ Sci B. 2023 Jun 15;24(6):463-484. doi: 10.1631/jzus.B2200625.
2
Factors affecting the sensitivity of quantitative severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 antigen test.影响定量严重急性呼吸综合征冠状病毒 2 抗原检测灵敏度的因素。
J Infect Chemother. 2023 Aug;29(8):754-758. doi: 10.1016/j.jiac.2023.04.005. Epub 2023 Apr 13.
3
Performance of Antigen Detection Tests for SARS-CoV-2: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
新型冠状病毒抗原检测试验的性能:系统评价与荟萃分析
Diagnostics (Basel). 2022 Jun 4;12(6):1388. doi: 10.3390/diagnostics12061388.
4
Direct comparison of Xpert Xpress, FilmArray Respiratory Panel, Lumipulse antigen test, and RT-qPCR in 165 nasopharyngeal swabs.165 份鼻咽拭子中 Xpert Xpress、FilmArray 呼吸道Panel、Lumipulse 抗原检测和 RT-qPCR 的直接比较。
BMC Infect Dis. 2022 Mar 4;22(1):221. doi: 10.1186/s12879-022-07185-w.
5
Performance of Rapid Antigen Tests for COVID-19 Diagnosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.用于新冠病毒诊断的快速抗原检测性能:一项系统评价与荟萃分析
Diagnostics (Basel). 2022 Jan 4;12(1):110. doi: 10.3390/diagnostics12010110.
6
Diagnostic Performance of Automated SARS-CoV-2 Antigen Assay in Nasal Swab during COVID-19 Vaccination Campaign.新冠疫苗接种活动期间鼻拭子中新冠病毒2型自动抗原检测的诊断性能
Diagnostics (Basel). 2021 Nov 15;11(11):2110. doi: 10.3390/diagnostics11112110.