Abstract
Background: Due to its great sensitivity, the nucleic acid amplification test (NAAT) is widely used for detection of respiratory viruses (RV). However, few reports have described a direct comparison between multiplex RT-PCR assays for RV. The objective of this study was to perform a direct comparison of three multiplex RT-PCR assays for the detection of respiratory viruses. Methods: A total of 201 respiratory samples (161 nasopharyngeal swab samples and 40 sputum samples) were tested with three commercial RV assays: Seegene Anyplex II RV16 (AP), LG AdvanSure RV (AD), and Biosewoom Real-Q RV (RQ). The additional tests for the discrepant results were conducted by repeat RV assay or monoplex PCR coupled direct sequencing. Data analysis using percent agreement, kappa, and prevalence-adjusted and bias-adjusted kappa (PABAK) values was performed for comparisons among the three RV assays. Results: Of the 201 samples, AP, AD, and RQ detected 105 (52.2%), 99 (49.3%), and 95 (47.3%) positive cases respectively. The overall agreement, kappa, and PABAK values for the three assays ranged between 97%-98%, 0.76-0.86, and 0.93-0.96 respectively. The performance of the three assays was very similar, with 94%-100% agreement for all comparisons, each virus types. The additional testing of samples showed discrepant results demonstrating that AD assay had the highest rate of concordance with original results. Conclusions: We suggest that all multiplex assay would be suitable for the detection of for respiratory viruses in clinical setting.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Journal | Journal of Clinical Laboratory Analysis |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Accepted/In press - 2017 |
Fingerprint
Keywords
- Agreement
- Nucleic acid amplification test
- Respiratory virus
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Immunology and Allergy
- Hematology
- Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health
- Clinical Biochemistry
- Medical Laboratory Technology
- Biochemistry, medical
- Microbiology (medical)
Cite this
Comparison of three multiplex PCR assays for detection of respiratory viruses : Anyplex II RV16, AdvanSure RV, and Real-Q RV. / Yun, Seung Gyu; Kim, Min Young; Choi, Jong Moon; Lee, Chang Kyu; Lim, Chae Seung; Cho, Yunjung; Suh, In Bum.
In: Journal of Clinical Laboratory Analysis, 2017.Research output: Contribution to journal › Article
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - Comparison of three multiplex PCR assays for detection of respiratory viruses
T2 - Anyplex II RV16, AdvanSure RV, and Real-Q RV
AU - Yun, Seung Gyu
AU - Kim, Min Young
AU - Choi, Jong Moon
AU - Lee, Chang Kyu
AU - Lim, Chae Seung
AU - Cho, Yunjung
AU - Suh, In Bum
PY - 2017
Y1 - 2017
N2 - Background: Due to its great sensitivity, the nucleic acid amplification test (NAAT) is widely used for detection of respiratory viruses (RV). However, few reports have described a direct comparison between multiplex RT-PCR assays for RV. The objective of this study was to perform a direct comparison of three multiplex RT-PCR assays for the detection of respiratory viruses. Methods: A total of 201 respiratory samples (161 nasopharyngeal swab samples and 40 sputum samples) were tested with three commercial RV assays: Seegene Anyplex II RV16 (AP), LG AdvanSure RV (AD), and Biosewoom Real-Q RV (RQ). The additional tests for the discrepant results were conducted by repeat RV assay or monoplex PCR coupled direct sequencing. Data analysis using percent agreement, kappa, and prevalence-adjusted and bias-adjusted kappa (PABAK) values was performed for comparisons among the three RV assays. Results: Of the 201 samples, AP, AD, and RQ detected 105 (52.2%), 99 (49.3%), and 95 (47.3%) positive cases respectively. The overall agreement, kappa, and PABAK values for the three assays ranged between 97%-98%, 0.76-0.86, and 0.93-0.96 respectively. The performance of the three assays was very similar, with 94%-100% agreement for all comparisons, each virus types. The additional testing of samples showed discrepant results demonstrating that AD assay had the highest rate of concordance with original results. Conclusions: We suggest that all multiplex assay would be suitable for the detection of for respiratory viruses in clinical setting.
AB - Background: Due to its great sensitivity, the nucleic acid amplification test (NAAT) is widely used for detection of respiratory viruses (RV). However, few reports have described a direct comparison between multiplex RT-PCR assays for RV. The objective of this study was to perform a direct comparison of three multiplex RT-PCR assays for the detection of respiratory viruses. Methods: A total of 201 respiratory samples (161 nasopharyngeal swab samples and 40 sputum samples) were tested with three commercial RV assays: Seegene Anyplex II RV16 (AP), LG AdvanSure RV (AD), and Biosewoom Real-Q RV (RQ). The additional tests for the discrepant results were conducted by repeat RV assay or monoplex PCR coupled direct sequencing. Data analysis using percent agreement, kappa, and prevalence-adjusted and bias-adjusted kappa (PABAK) values was performed for comparisons among the three RV assays. Results: Of the 201 samples, AP, AD, and RQ detected 105 (52.2%), 99 (49.3%), and 95 (47.3%) positive cases respectively. The overall agreement, kappa, and PABAK values for the three assays ranged between 97%-98%, 0.76-0.86, and 0.93-0.96 respectively. The performance of the three assays was very similar, with 94%-100% agreement for all comparisons, each virus types. The additional testing of samples showed discrepant results demonstrating that AD assay had the highest rate of concordance with original results. Conclusions: We suggest that all multiplex assay would be suitable for the detection of for respiratory viruses in clinical setting.
KW - Agreement
KW - Nucleic acid amplification test
KW - Respiratory virus
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85017559321&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85017559321&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1002/jcla.22230
DO - 10.1002/jcla.22230
M3 - Article
C2 - 28397965
AN - SCOPUS:85017559321
JO - Journal of Clinical Laboratory Analysis
JF - Journal of Clinical Laboratory Analysis
SN - 0887-8013
ER -