4.6 Article

Comparison of two broadly multiplexed PCR systems for viral detection in clinical respiratory tract specimens from immunocompromised children

Journal

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL VIROLOGY
Volume 53, Issue 4, Pages 308-313

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.jcv.2011.12.020

Keywords

Immunocompromised; Multiplex real-time PCR; Respiratory tract; Viral detection

Categories

Funding

  1. American Lebanese Syrian Associated Charities, ALSAC
  2. Anderson Charitable Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: The detection of viral respiratory tract infections has evolved greatly with the development of PCR based commercial systems capable of simultaneously detecting a wide variety of pathogens. Objectives: Evaluate the relative performance of two commercial broad range systems for the detection of viral agents in clinical respiratory tract specimens from immunocompromised children. Study design: A total of 176 patient samples were included in the analysis, representing only the first sample collected for each patient, and excluding failed reactions. Samples were de-identified and assayed in parallel using two different, broadly multiplexed PCR systems: ResPlex (TM) II Panel v2.0 (ResPlex), Qiagen, Hilden, Germany and FilmArray (R) Respiratory Panel (FilmArray), Idaho Technology Inc., Salt Lake City, UT. Method comparison was based upon pair-wise concordance of results according to patient age, viral target and number of targets detected. Results: The two systems showed an overall concordance, by patient, of 83.8% (p = 0.0001). FilmArray detected at least one target in 68.8% of samples, while ResPlex detected at least one target in 56.8%. ResPlex failed to detect 20.7% of FilmArray positives, and FilmArray failed to detect 4% of ResPlex positives. The relative performance of each system (including which system detected a higher number of positive samples) varied when stratified by target viral pathogen. Conclusions: Broadly multiplexed PCR is an effective means of detecting large numbers of clinically relevant respiratory viral pathogens. (C) 2011 Elsevier B. V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available