将自动盒式 ARIES SARS-CoV-2 检测法(RUO)与自动 Cepheid Xpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2 PCR 作为金标准进行对比评估。

Konstantin Tanida, Lars Koste, Christian Koenig, Werner Wenzel, Andreas Fritsch, Hagen Frickmann
{"title":"将自动盒式 ARIES SARS-CoV-2 检测法(RUO)与自动 Cepheid Xpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2 PCR 作为金标准进行对比评估。","authors":"Konstantin Tanida, Lars Koste, Christian Koenig, Werner Wenzel, Andreas Fritsch, Hagen Frickmann","doi":"10.1556/1886.2020.00017","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>To evaluate the automated cartridge-based PCR approach ARIES SARS-CoV-2 Assay targeting the ORF-sequence and the N-gene of SARS-CoV-2.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In line with the suggestions by Rabenau and colleagues, the automated ARIES SARS-CoV-2 Assay was challenged with strongly positive samples, weakly positive samples and negative samples. Further, intra-assay and inter-assay precision as well as the limit-of-detection (lod) were defined with quantified target RNA and DNA. The Cepheid Xpert Xpress SARS-Cov-2 Assay was used as gold standard.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Concordance between the ARIES assay and the Cepheid assay was 100% for strongly positive samples and for negative samples, respectively. For weakly positive samples as confirmed applying the Cepheid assay, a relevant minority of 4 out of 15 samples (26.7%) went undetected by the ARIES assay. Intra- and inter-assay precision were satisfactory, while the lod was in the 103 DNA copies/reaction-range, in the 103 virus copies/reaction-range, or in the 103-104 free RNA copies/reaction-range in our hands.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The automated ARIES assay shows comparable test characteristics as the Cepheid assay focusing on strongly positive and negative samples but a slightly reduced sensitivity with weakly positive samples. Decisions on diagnostic use should include considerations on the lod.</p>","PeriodicalId":11929,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Microbiology & Immunology","volume":"10 3","pages":"156-164"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-08-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/3d/73/eujmi-10-156.PMC7592518.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluation of the automated cartridge-based ARIES SARS-CoV-2 Assay (RUO) against automated Cepheid Xpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2 PCR as gold standard.\",\"authors\":\"Konstantin Tanida, Lars Koste, Christian Koenig, Werner Wenzel, Andreas Fritsch, Hagen Frickmann\",\"doi\":\"10.1556/1886.2020.00017\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>To evaluate the automated cartridge-based PCR approach ARIES SARS-CoV-2 Assay targeting the ORF-sequence and the N-gene of SARS-CoV-2.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In line with the suggestions by Rabenau and colleagues, the automated ARIES SARS-CoV-2 Assay was challenged with strongly positive samples, weakly positive samples and negative samples. Further, intra-assay and inter-assay precision as well as the limit-of-detection (lod) were defined with quantified target RNA and DNA. The Cepheid Xpert Xpress SARS-Cov-2 Assay was used as gold standard.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Concordance between the ARIES assay and the Cepheid assay was 100% for strongly positive samples and for negative samples, respectively. For weakly positive samples as confirmed applying the Cepheid assay, a relevant minority of 4 out of 15 samples (26.7%) went undetected by the ARIES assay. Intra- and inter-assay precision were satisfactory, while the lod was in the 103 DNA copies/reaction-range, in the 103 virus copies/reaction-range, or in the 103-104 free RNA copies/reaction-range in our hands.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The automated ARIES assay shows comparable test characteristics as the Cepheid assay focusing on strongly positive and negative samples but a slightly reduced sensitivity with weakly positive samples. Decisions on diagnostic use should include considerations on the lod.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11929,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Journal of Microbiology & Immunology\",\"volume\":\"10 3\",\"pages\":\"156-164\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-08-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/3d/73/eujmi-10-156.PMC7592518.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Journal of Microbiology & Immunology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1556/1886.2020.00017\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Microbiology & Immunology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1556/1886.2020.00017","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

引言评估针对 SARS-CoV-2 的 ORF 序列和 N 基因的自动盒式 PCR 方法 ARIES SARS-CoV-2 Assay:根据 Rabenau 及其同事的建议,用强阳性样本、弱阳性样本和阴性样本对自动 ARIES SARS-CoV-2 检测法进行了挑战。此外,还利用量化的目标 RNA 和 DNA 确定了测定内和测定间的精确度以及检测限(lod)。Cepheid Xpert Xpress SARS-Cov-2 分析法被用作金标准:结果:对于强阳性样本和阴性样本,ARIES 检测法和 Cepheid 检测法的一致性分别为 100%。对于应用 Cepheid 检测法确认的弱阳性样本,15 个样本中有 4 个样本(26.7%)未被 ARIES 检测到。分析仪内部和分析仪之间的精确度令人满意,而我们手中的lod在103个DNA拷贝/反应范围内、103个病毒拷贝/反应范围内或103-104个游离RNA拷贝/反应范围内:结论:自动 ARIES 检测法与 Cepheid 检测法对强阳性和阴性样本的检测特性相当,但对弱阳性样本的灵敏度略低。在决定诊断用途时,应考虑到实验室条件。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Evaluation of the automated cartridge-based ARIES SARS-CoV-2 Assay (RUO) against automated Cepheid Xpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2 PCR as gold standard.

Introduction: To evaluate the automated cartridge-based PCR approach ARIES SARS-CoV-2 Assay targeting the ORF-sequence and the N-gene of SARS-CoV-2.

Methods: In line with the suggestions by Rabenau and colleagues, the automated ARIES SARS-CoV-2 Assay was challenged with strongly positive samples, weakly positive samples and negative samples. Further, intra-assay and inter-assay precision as well as the limit-of-detection (lod) were defined with quantified target RNA and DNA. The Cepheid Xpert Xpress SARS-Cov-2 Assay was used as gold standard.

Results: Concordance between the ARIES assay and the Cepheid assay was 100% for strongly positive samples and for negative samples, respectively. For weakly positive samples as confirmed applying the Cepheid assay, a relevant minority of 4 out of 15 samples (26.7%) went undetected by the ARIES assay. Intra- and inter-assay precision were satisfactory, while the lod was in the 103 DNA copies/reaction-range, in the 103 virus copies/reaction-range, or in the 103-104 free RNA copies/reaction-range in our hands.

Conclusions: The automated ARIES assay shows comparable test characteristics as the Cepheid assay focusing on strongly positive and negative samples but a slightly reduced sensitivity with weakly positive samples. Decisions on diagnostic use should include considerations on the lod.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
17th International Congress on Toxoplasmosis (ToxoXVII) Berlin, Germany, May 26th–29th 2024 The impact of ketogenic diet on the onset and progression of multiple sclerosis. Not only for Christmas: Prophylactic oral application of trans-cinnamaldehyde alleviates acute murine campylobacteriosis. Phytochemicals and micronutrients in suppressing infectivity caused by SARS-CoV-2 virions and seasonal coronavirus HCoV-229E in vivo. Performance of MassARRAY system for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 compared to real-time PCR.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1