Real-world comparison of two molecular methods for detection of respiratory viruses

S. Ali, James E. Gern, Tina V. Hartert, Kathryn M. Edwards, Marie R. Griffin, E. Kathryn Miller, Tebeb Gebretsadik, Tressa Pappas, Wai Ming Lee, John V. Williams

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

26 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Molecular polymerase chain reaction (PCR) based assays are increasingly used to diagnose viral respiratory infections and conduct epidemiology studies. Molecular assays have generally been evaluated by comparing them to conventional direct fluorescent antibody (DFA) or viral culture techniques, with few published direct comparisons between molecular methods or between institutions. We sought to perform a real-world comparison of two molecular respiratory viral diagnostic methods between two experienced respiratory virus research laboratories. Methods. We tested nasal and throat swab specimens obtained from 225 infants with respiratory illness for 11 common respiratory viruses using both a multiplex assay (Respiratory MultiCode-PLx Assay [RMA]) and individual real-time RT-PCR (RT-rtPCR). Results: Both assays detected viruses in more than 70% of specimens, but there was discordance. The RMA assay detected significantly more human metapneumovirus (HMPV) and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV), while RT-rtPCR detected significantly more influenza A. We speculated that primer differences accounted for these discrepancies and redesigned the primers and probes for influenza A in the RMA assay, and for HMPV and RSV in the RT-rtPCR assay. The tests were then repeated and again compared. The new primers led to improved detection of HMPV and RSV by RT-rtPCR assay, but the RMA assay remained similar in terms of influenza detection. Conclusions: Given the absence of a gold standard, clinical and research laboratories should regularly correlate the results of molecular assays with other PCR based assays, other laboratories, and with standard virologic methods to ensure consistency and accuracy.

Original languageEnglish
Article number332
JournalVirology Journal
Volume8
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2011
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Human respiratory syncytial virus
Metapneumovirus
Human Influenza
Viruses
Real-Time Polymerase Chain Reaction
Viral Antibodies
Culture Techniques
Polymerase Chain Reaction
Virus Diseases
Pharynx
Nose
Research
Respiratory Tract Infections
Epidemiology

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Virology
  • Infectious Diseases

Cite this

Ali, S., Gern, J. E., Hartert, T. V., Edwards, K. M., Griffin, M. R., Miller, E. K., ... Williams, J. V. (2011). Real-world comparison of two molecular methods for detection of respiratory viruses. Virology Journal, 8, [332]. https://doi.org/10.1186/1743-422X-8-332

Real-world comparison of two molecular methods for detection of respiratory viruses. / Ali, S.; Gern, James E.; Hartert, Tina V.; Edwards, Kathryn M.; Griffin, Marie R.; Miller, E. Kathryn; Gebretsadik, Tebeb; Pappas, Tressa; Lee, Wai Ming; Williams, John V.

In: Virology Journal, Vol. 8, 332, 2011.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Ali, S, Gern, JE, Hartert, TV, Edwards, KM, Griffin, MR, Miller, EK, Gebretsadik, T, Pappas, T, Lee, WM & Williams, JV 2011, 'Real-world comparison of two molecular methods for detection of respiratory viruses', Virology Journal, vol. 8, 332. https://doi.org/10.1186/1743-422X-8-332
Ali, S. ; Gern, James E. ; Hartert, Tina V. ; Edwards, Kathryn M. ; Griffin, Marie R. ; Miller, E. Kathryn ; Gebretsadik, Tebeb ; Pappas, Tressa ; Lee, Wai Ming ; Williams, John V. / Real-world comparison of two molecular methods for detection of respiratory viruses. In: Virology Journal. 2011 ; Vol. 8.
@article{5df0811678e440d49a6cee79c6e8341f,
title = "Real-world comparison of two molecular methods for detection of respiratory viruses",
abstract = "Background: Molecular polymerase chain reaction (PCR) based assays are increasingly used to diagnose viral respiratory infections and conduct epidemiology studies. Molecular assays have generally been evaluated by comparing them to conventional direct fluorescent antibody (DFA) or viral culture techniques, with few published direct comparisons between molecular methods or between institutions. We sought to perform a real-world comparison of two molecular respiratory viral diagnostic methods between two experienced respiratory virus research laboratories. Methods. We tested nasal and throat swab specimens obtained from 225 infants with respiratory illness for 11 common respiratory viruses using both a multiplex assay (Respiratory MultiCode-PLx Assay [RMA]) and individual real-time RT-PCR (RT-rtPCR). Results: Both assays detected viruses in more than 70{\%} of specimens, but there was discordance. The RMA assay detected significantly more human metapneumovirus (HMPV) and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV), while RT-rtPCR detected significantly more influenza A. We speculated that primer differences accounted for these discrepancies and redesigned the primers and probes for influenza A in the RMA assay, and for HMPV and RSV in the RT-rtPCR assay. The tests were then repeated and again compared. The new primers led to improved detection of HMPV and RSV by RT-rtPCR assay, but the RMA assay remained similar in terms of influenza detection. Conclusions: Given the absence of a gold standard, clinical and research laboratories should regularly correlate the results of molecular assays with other PCR based assays, other laboratories, and with standard virologic methods to ensure consistency and accuracy.",
author = "S. Ali and Gern, {James E.} and Hartert, {Tina V.} and Edwards, {Kathryn M.} and Griffin, {Marie R.} and Miller, {E. Kathryn} and Tebeb Gebretsadik and Tressa Pappas and Lee, {Wai Ming} and Williams, {John V.}",
year = "2011",
doi = "10.1186/1743-422X-8-332",
language = "English",
volume = "8",
journal = "Virology Journal",
issn = "1743-422X",
publisher = "BioMed Central",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Real-world comparison of two molecular methods for detection of respiratory viruses

AU - Ali, S.

AU - Gern, James E.

AU - Hartert, Tina V.

AU - Edwards, Kathryn M.

AU - Griffin, Marie R.

AU - Miller, E. Kathryn

AU - Gebretsadik, Tebeb

AU - Pappas, Tressa

AU - Lee, Wai Ming

AU - Williams, John V.

PY - 2011

Y1 - 2011

N2 - Background: Molecular polymerase chain reaction (PCR) based assays are increasingly used to diagnose viral respiratory infections and conduct epidemiology studies. Molecular assays have generally been evaluated by comparing them to conventional direct fluorescent antibody (DFA) or viral culture techniques, with few published direct comparisons between molecular methods or between institutions. We sought to perform a real-world comparison of two molecular respiratory viral diagnostic methods between two experienced respiratory virus research laboratories. Methods. We tested nasal and throat swab specimens obtained from 225 infants with respiratory illness for 11 common respiratory viruses using both a multiplex assay (Respiratory MultiCode-PLx Assay [RMA]) and individual real-time RT-PCR (RT-rtPCR). Results: Both assays detected viruses in more than 70% of specimens, but there was discordance. The RMA assay detected significantly more human metapneumovirus (HMPV) and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV), while RT-rtPCR detected significantly more influenza A. We speculated that primer differences accounted for these discrepancies and redesigned the primers and probes for influenza A in the RMA assay, and for HMPV and RSV in the RT-rtPCR assay. The tests were then repeated and again compared. The new primers led to improved detection of HMPV and RSV by RT-rtPCR assay, but the RMA assay remained similar in terms of influenza detection. Conclusions: Given the absence of a gold standard, clinical and research laboratories should regularly correlate the results of molecular assays with other PCR based assays, other laboratories, and with standard virologic methods to ensure consistency and accuracy.

AB - Background: Molecular polymerase chain reaction (PCR) based assays are increasingly used to diagnose viral respiratory infections and conduct epidemiology studies. Molecular assays have generally been evaluated by comparing them to conventional direct fluorescent antibody (DFA) or viral culture techniques, with few published direct comparisons between molecular methods or between institutions. We sought to perform a real-world comparison of two molecular respiratory viral diagnostic methods between two experienced respiratory virus research laboratories. Methods. We tested nasal and throat swab specimens obtained from 225 infants with respiratory illness for 11 common respiratory viruses using both a multiplex assay (Respiratory MultiCode-PLx Assay [RMA]) and individual real-time RT-PCR (RT-rtPCR). Results: Both assays detected viruses in more than 70% of specimens, but there was discordance. The RMA assay detected significantly more human metapneumovirus (HMPV) and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV), while RT-rtPCR detected significantly more influenza A. We speculated that primer differences accounted for these discrepancies and redesigned the primers and probes for influenza A in the RMA assay, and for HMPV and RSV in the RT-rtPCR assay. The tests were then repeated and again compared. The new primers led to improved detection of HMPV and RSV by RT-rtPCR assay, but the RMA assay remained similar in terms of influenza detection. Conclusions: Given the absence of a gold standard, clinical and research laboratories should regularly correlate the results of molecular assays with other PCR based assays, other laboratories, and with standard virologic methods to ensure consistency and accuracy.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=79959665953&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=79959665953&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1186/1743-422X-8-332

DO - 10.1186/1743-422X-8-332

M3 - Article

VL - 8

JO - Virology Journal

JF - Virology Journal

SN - 1743-422X

M1 - 332

ER -