Comparative study of four SARS-CoV-2 Nucleic Acid Amplification Test (NAAT) platforms demonstrates that ID NOW performance is impaired substantially by patient and specimen type

bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)(2020)

引用 0|浏览0
暂无评分
摘要
Abstract The advent of the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States created a unique situation where multiple molecular diagnostic assays with various indications for use in the detection of SARS-CoV-2 rapidly received Emergency Use Authorization by the FDA, were validated by laboratories and utilized clinically, all within a period of a few weeks. We compared the performance of four of these assays that were being evaluated for use at our institution: Abbott RealTime m2000 SARS-CoV-2 Assay, DiaSorin Simplexa COVID-19 Direct, Cepheid Xpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2 and Abbott ID NOW COVID-19. Nasopharyngeal and nasal specimens were collected from 88 ED and hospital-admitted patients and tested by the four methods in parallel to compare performance. ID NOW performance stood out as significantly worse than the other three assays despite demonstrating comparable analytic sensitivity. Further study determined that the use of a foam nasal swab compared to a nylon flocked nasopharyngeal swab, as well as use in a population chronically vs. acutely positive for SARS-CoV-2, were significant factors in the poor comparable performance.
更多
查看译文
关键词
naat,sars-cov
AI 理解论文
溯源树
样例
生成溯源树,研究论文发展脉络
Chat Paper
正在生成论文摘要