Search

Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), can be diagnosed using rapid real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR), real-time reverse transcription PCR (rRT-PCR), or rapid antigen testing. Among these, rRT-PCR is considered the gold standard assay. The Xpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2 assay is a rapid, real-time PCR test; approved by the Korean Disease Control and Prevention Agency in 2020. Current performance of the Xpert assay (Xpert) with the STANDARD M nCoV Real-Time Detection kit (SD) were determined. Methods: All samples used by the SD test team were immediately transferred to the Xpert test team within 24 hours. Both tests were conducted between April 2023 and July 2023. Exclusion criteria were studies which show either inconclusive, invalid, or erroneous results. Positive rate, sensitivity, specificity, over-all concordance rate, positive concordance rate, discordance rate, false-positive rate, and false-negative rates of the Xpert assay with the STANDARD M nCoV Real-Time Detection kit were determined. Results: Samples from 347 patients (174 men and 173 women) with a median age of 60 years (range; 6 - 90 years) were included. Positive rate, sensitivity, specificity, over-all concordance rate, positive concordance rate, discordance rate, false-positive rate, and false-negative rates of the Xpert assay were 11.2%, 82.1%, 95.0%, 93.9%, 6.6%, 6.1%, 41.0%, and 1.6%, respectively. Conclusions: COVID-19 results from Xpert should be confirmed through rRT-PCR because of low sensitivity (82.1%) and high false-positive rate (41.0%). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: COVID-19, caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), can be diagnosed using rapid real-time PCR, real-time reverse transcription PCR (rRT-PCR), or rapid antigen testing. Among these, rRT-PCR is considered the gold standard assay. The Xpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2 assay is a rapid real-time PCR test, approved by the Korean Disease Control and Prevention Agency in 2020. The overall concordance and positive concordance rates of the Xpert assay with the STANDARD M nCoV Real-Time Detection kit were determined. Methods: All samples with positive or inconclusive Xpert test results from July 2021 to February 2023 that underwent confirmatory testing using the reference rRT-PCR assay were included in the analysis. Results: Samples from 224 patients (93 men and 131 women) with a median age of 59 years (range 15 - 90 years) were included. Of 212 samples that tested positive using Xpert, 112 (52.8%) were true positves and 100 (47.2%) were false positives on rRT-PCR testing. The overall concordance and positive concordance rates were 52.8% (112/212) and 54.5% (112/224), respectively. In the Xpert positive group, the samples had a lower Ct value for the E gene than the N2 gene. The Ct values for the E and N2 genes were significantly lower in the positive group than in the inconclusive group. Conclusions: Positive or inconclusive Xpert results should be confirmed by the gold standard rRT-PCR for early control of this disease. Furthermore, Korea's policy should be reconsidered given the high false-positive rate of the rapid real-time PCR Xpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2 assay. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Purpose With over 50 SARS-CoV-2 gene amplification assays that have been EUA cleared with minimal experimental validation performed, it is likely that not all of these assays are comparable in their ability to detect SARS-CoV-2 in clinical specimens. Thermo Fisher Scientific is a relatively new company in the molecular diagnostics field and the purpose of this study was to compare the performance of the Thermo Fisher TaqPath™ Combo Kit with an established test, the Cepheid Xpert® Xpress SARS-CoV-2 assay, for its ability to detect SARS-CoV-2 in nasopharyngeal specimens. Methods A total of 300 randomly selected nasopharyngeal specimens were evaluated and tested by the TaqPath and GeneXpert assays. Discordant test specimens were arbitrated by performing an alternative PCR assay and Sanger sequencing. Results The TaqPath assay had a 96.7 and 99.6% positive and negative agreement respectively when compared to the Xpert Xpress test. However, after test arbitration, the three discordant specimens were arbitrated in favor of the TaqPath assay producing a positive and negative percent agreement of 100% for the TaqPath Combo Kit while the Xpress SARS-CoV-2 assay had a positive and negative percent agreement of 98.3 and 99.2% respectively. Conclusions The TaqPath Combo Kit is a high complexity assay that compares favorably with the Xpert Xpress test and can be reliably used for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 in nasopharyngeal specimens.

ABSTRACT Xpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2/Flu/RSV is a rapid diagnostic test currently approved for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 using upper respiratory tract specimens. This study attempts to assess the performance of this assay using upper and lower respiratory tract specimens by comparing its results to the lab-developed PCR test. We assessed the performance of GeneXpert for the detection of SARS-CoV-2, influenza A, influenza B, and respiratory syncytial virus for upper respiratory tract specimens. In addition, the SARS-CoV-2 detection was evaluated for lower respiratory tract specimens (bronchoalveolar lavage and tracheal aspirate). Precision and reproducibility of the test were also assessed using samples with varying cycle threshold values. Xpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2/Flu/RSV shows 100% positive and negative agreements for all four targets when tested using upper respiratory tract specimens. For lower respiratory tract specimens, tracheal aspirate and bronchoalveolar lavage samples respectively show 96% and 100% positive percent agreement for SARS-Cov-2 target only. No positive flu/RSV samples were included for lower respiratory tract specimens. Both samples show 100% negative percent agreement. The precision and reproducibility assay also showed 100% correspondence. Xpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2/Flu/RSV can be potentially used for SARS-Cov-2 detection in lower respiratory tract specimens. Performance passed our study acceptance criteria and shows promising implications as a point of care detection assay. IMPORTANCE Cepheid’s Xpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2/Flu/RSV provides a means of rapid diagnosis that can help in hospital bed management and patient flow. It is also important for each microbiology lab to increase its capacity and most importantly have a different platform to overcome the anticipated reagent shortage at times of peak community transmission. There is limited evidence on using it for lower respiratory tract specimens. Here we present our validation for upper respiratory tract specimens as well as a potential use for lower respiratory specimens (BAL and TA), and we discuss some of the applications we have been using in our organization.

Purpose: With over 50 SARS-CoV-2 gene amplification assays that have been EUA cleared with minimal experimental validation performed, it is likely that not all of these assays are comparable in their ability to detect SARS-CoV-2 in clinical specimens. Thermo Fisher Scientific is a relatively new company in the molecular diagnostics field and the purpose of this study was to compare the performance of the Thermo Fisher TaqPath™ Combo Kit with an established test, the Cepheid Xpert® Xpress SARS-CoV-2 assay, for its ability to detect SARS-CoV-2 in nasopharyngeal specimens.Methods: A total of 300 randomly selected nasopharyngeal specimens were evaluated and tested by the TaqPath and GeneXpert assays. Discordant test specimens were arbitrated by performing an alternative PCR assay and Sanger sequencing.Results: The TaqPath assay had a 96.7 and 99.6% positive and negative agreement respectively when compared to the Xpert Xpress test. However, after test arbitration, the three discordant specimens were arbitrated in favor of the TaqPath assay producing a positive and negative percent agreement of 100% for the TaqPath Combo Kit while the Xpress SARS-CoV-2 assay had a positive and negative percent agreement of 98.3 and 99.2% respectively.Conclusions: The TaqPath Combo Kit is a high complexity assay that compares favorably with the Xpert Xpress test and can be reliably used for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 in nasopharyngeal specimens. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Pool testing for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) preserves testing resources at the risk of missing specimens through specimen dilution.Methods: To determine whether SARS-CoV-2 specimens would be missed after 10:1 pooling, we identified 10 specimens with midrange (ie, 25-34 cycles) and 10 with late (ie, >34-45 cycles) crossing threshold (Ct) values and tested these both neat and after 10:1 pooling. Final test results and Ct changes were compared.Results: Overall, 17 of 20 specimens that contained SARS-CoV-2 were detected after 10:1 pooling with the Xpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2 Assay (Cepheid), rendering an 85% positive percentage of agreement. All 10 of 10 specimens with an undiluted Ct in the mid-Ct range were detected after 10:1 pooling, in contrast to 7 of 10 with an undiluted Ct in the late-Ct range. The overall Ct difference between the neat testing and the 10:1 pool was 2.9 cycles for the N2 gene target and 3 cycles for the E gene target. The N2 gene reaction was more sensitive than the E gene reaction, detecting 16 of 20 positive specimens after 10:1 pooling compared with 9 of 20 specimens.Conclusions: An 85% positive percentage of agreement was achieved, with only specimens with low viral loads being missed following 10:1 pooling. The average impact on both reverse transcription polymerase chain reactions within this assay was about 3 cycles. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Xpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2/Flu/RSV is a rapid diagnostic test currently approved for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 using upper respiratory tract specimens. This study attempts to assess the performance of this assay using upper and lower respiratory tract specimens by comparing its results to the lab-developed PCR test. We assessed the performance of GeneXpert for the detection of SARS-CoV-2, influenza A, influenza B, and respiratory syncytial virus for upper respiratory tract specimens. In addition, the SARS-CoV-2 detection was evaluated for lower respiratory tract specimens (bronchoalveolar lavage and tracheal aspirate). Precision and reproducibility of the test were also assessed using samples with varying cycle threshold values. Xpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2/Flu/RSV shows 100% positive and negative agreements for all four targets when tested using upper respiratory tract specimens. For lower respiratory tract specimens, tracheal aspirate and bronchoalveolar lavage samples respectively show 96% and 100% positive percent agreement for SARS-Cov-2 target only. No positive flu/RSV samples were included for lower respiratory tract specimens. Both samples show 100% negative percent agreement. The precision and reproducibility assay also showed 100% correspondence. Xpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2/Flu/RSV can be potentially used for SARS-Cov-2 detection in lower respiratory tract specimens. Performance passed our study acceptance criteria and shows promising implications as a point of care detection assay. IMPORTANCE Cepheid's Xpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2/Flu/RSV provides a means of rapid diagnosis that can help in hospital bed management and patient flow. It is also important for each microbiology lab to increase its capacity and most importantly have a different platform to overcome the anticipated reagent shortage at times of peak community transmission. There is limited evidence on using it for lower respiratory tract specimens. Here we present our validation for upper respiratory tract specimens as well as a potential use for lower respiratory specimens (BAL and TA), and we discuss some of the applications we have been using in our organization.

The sensitivity of molecular diagnostics could be affected by nucleotide variants in pathogen genes, and the sites affected by such variants should be monitored. We report a single-nucleotide variant (SNV) in the nucleocapsid (N) gene of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), i.e., G29179T, which impairs the diagnostic sensitivity of the Xpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2 assay (Cepheid, Sunnyvale, CA, USA). We observed significant differences between the threshold cycle (Ct) values for envelope ( E ) and N genes and confirmed the SNV as the cause of the differences using Sanger sequencing. This SNV, G29179T, is the most prevalent in Korea and is associated with the B.1.497 virus lineage, which is dominant in Korea. Clinical laboratories should be aware of the various SNVs in the SARS-CoV-2 genome and consider their potential effects on the diagnosis of coronavirus disease 2019.

• Testing DTS & LRT specimens by Xpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2 assay with pre-treatment. • Deep Throat Saliva specimens homogenized with Phosphate-Buffered Saline. • Lower Respiratory Tract specimens homogenized with maintenance medium. • Performance of Xpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2 was good & comparable with reference method. Xpert® Xpress SARS-CoV-2 assay is only validated on nasopharyngeal specimens for detection of SARS-CoV-2. Other specimen types such as deep throat saliva (DTS), also known as posterior oropharyngeal saliva and lower-respiratorytract specimens (LRT) including sputum, tracheal aspirate and bronchoalveolar lavage are not validated. These non-validated specimen types, however, do have significant diagnostic value. Evaluate the performance of Xpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2 assay for detection of SARS-CoV-2 from DTS and LRT specimens. 162 specimens from 158 patients with suspected COVID-19 disease were tested with Xpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2 assay. These included 120 DTS and 42 LRT specimens i.e. 35 sputum, 6 tracheal aspirate and one bronchoalveolar lavage. Results were compared to those by the TIB-Molbiol LightMix® SarbecoV E-gene assay. Xpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2 assay has satisfactory performance when compared with reference method. The positive percent agreement (PPA) of DTS and LRT specimens were 98.86 % & 100 % respectively while the negative percent agreement (NPA) was 100 % for both DTS and LRT specimens. This study demonstrated with appropriate sample pre-treatment, Xpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2 assay can be used to test on non-validated specimen types including DTS & LRT specimens. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]