Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 7 de 7
J Infect ; 2022 Sep 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2230969
J Infect ; 86(3): e61-e63, 2023 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2170580

Genomics , Reinfection , Humans
Int J Infect Dis ; 105: 7-14, 2021 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1068927


BACKGROUND: Reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) is the gold standard for detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2). Previously, the accuracy of the quantitative LUMIPULSE SARS-CoV-2 antigen test was demonstrated using samples collected retrospectively. In this study, the LUMIPULSE antigen test was clinically validated using prospective samples. METHODS: In total, 1033 nasopharyngeal swab samples were collected from 1033 individuals, and an additional 275 follow-up samples were collected from 43 patients who subsequently tested positive for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). All 1308 samples were subjected to quantitative RT-PCR (RT-qPCR) and the antigen test. The antibody response was investigated for patients with discordant results to clarify if seroconversion had occurred. RESULTS: RT-qPCR identified 990 samples as negative and 43 as positive, while the antigen test identified 992 samples as negative, 37 as positive and four as inconclusive. The overall concordance rate was 99.7% (1026/1029). Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value of the antigen test were 92.5% (37/40), 100% (989/989), 100% (37/37) and 99.7% (989/992), respectively, after exclusion of the four inconclusive results. The kappa coefficient was 0.960 (95% confidence interval 0.892-0.960), suggesting excellent agreement between the two tests. Seropositivity in five of seven patients with discordant results suggested that the discrepancy was caused by samples collected during the late phase of infection. Using follow-up samples, correlation was observed between the antigen level and the viral load or cycle threshold value. The concordance rate between these test results tended to be high among samples collected 0-9 days after symptom onset, but this decreased gradually in samples collected thereafter. CONCLUSIONS: This prospective study demonstrated that the LUMIPULSE antigen test is a highly accurate diagnostic test for SARS-CoV-2.

COVID-19 Nucleic Acid Testing , COVID-19 Serological Testing , COVID-19/diagnosis , Nasopharynx/virology , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Humans , Prospective Studies , Retrospective Studies
Int J Infect Dis ; 99: 397-402, 2020 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-708794


In routine clinical practice, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection is determined by reverse-transcription PCR (RT-PCR). In the current pandemic, a more rapid and high-throughput method is in growing demand. Here, we validated the performance of a new antigen test (LUMIPULSE) based on chemiluminescence enzyme immunoassay. A total of 313 nasopharyngeal swabs (82 serial samples from 7 infected patients and 231 individual samples from 4 infected patients and 215 uninfected individuals) were analyzed for SARS-CoV-2 with quantitative RT-PCR (RT-qPCR) and then subjected to LUMIPULSE. We determined the cutoff value for antigen detection using receiver operating characteristic curve analysis and compared the performance of the antigen test with that of RT-qPCR. We also compared the viral loads and antigen levels in serial samples from seven infected patients. Using RT-qPCR as the reference, the antigen test exhibited 55.2% sensitivity and 99.6% specificity, with a 91.4% overall agreement rate (286/313). In specimens with > 100 viral copies and between 10 and 100 copies, the antigen test showed 100% and 85% concordance with RT-qPCR, respectively. This concordance declined with lower viral loads. In the serially followed patients, the antigen levels showed a steady decline, along with viral clearance. This gradual decline was in contrast with the abrupt positive-to-negative and negative-to-positive status changes observed with RT-qPCR, particularly in the late phase of infection. In summary, the LUMIPULSE antigen test can rapidly identify SARS-CoV-2-infected individuals with moderate to high viral loads and may be helpful for monitoring viral clearance in hospitalized patients.

Clinical Laboratory Techniques , Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis , Real-Time Polymerase Chain Reaction , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , COVID-19 Testing , Clinical Laboratory Techniques/methods , Humans , Immunoenzyme Techniques , Luminescent Measurements , Nasal Cavity/virology , Pandemics , Real-Time Polymerase Chain Reaction/methods , SARS-CoV-2 , Sensitivity and Specificity , Viral Load
J Virol Methods ; 284: 113926, 2020 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-635296


BACKGROUND: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) which emerged in the city of Wuhan, Hubei Province, China, has spread worldwide and is threatening human life. The detection of SARS-CoV-2 is critical for preventing new outbreaks, curbing disease spread, and managing patients. Currently, a reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) assay is used to detect the virus in clinical laboratories. However, although this assay is considered to have high specificity, its sensitivity is reportedly as low as 60-70 %. Improved sensitivity is, therefore, urgently required. METHODS: We used the primers and single-quencher probes recommended by the CDC (N1, N2 and N3) in the USA and the NIID (N1 and N2) in Japan. In addition, we designed double-quencher probes according to the virus sequence provided by the NIID to develop a further assay (termed the YCH assay [N1 and N2]). Using these assays, we conducted RT-PCR with serially diluted DNA positive controls to assess and compare the detection sensitivity of the three assays. Furthermore, 66 nasopharyngeal swabs were tested to determine the diagnostic performances. RESULTS: The threshold cycle (Ct) value of the RT-PCR was relatively low for the CDC and YCH assays compared with the NIID assay. Serial dilution assays showed that both the CDC and YCH assays could detect low copy numbers of the DNA positive control. The background fluorescence signal at the baseline was lower for the YCH assay compared with the NIID assay. We assessed the diagnostic performance between single- (NIID) and double-quencher (YCH) probes using 66 nasopharyngeal swabs. When the results of YCH-N2 assay were used as a reference, each assay detected SARS-CoV-2 with positive percent agreements of 56 % for NIID-N1, 61 % for YCH-N1, and 94 % for NIID-N2, and 100 % negative percent agreements for NIID-N1, YCH-N1 and NIID-N2. CONCLUSION: Double-quencher probes decreased the background fluorescence and improved the detection sensitivity of RT-PCR for SARS-CoV-2.

Betacoronavirus/isolation & purification , Clinical Laboratory Techniques/methods , Coronavirus Infections/virology , Pneumonia, Viral/virology , Reverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction/methods , Base Sequence , Betacoronavirus/genetics , COVID-19 , COVID-19 Testing , Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , DNA Primers/genetics , Humans , Japan , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis , RNA, Viral/analysis , RNA, Viral/genetics , SARS-CoV-2 , Sensitivity and Specificity , United States
J Clin Virol ; 129: 104543, 2020 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-633897


BACKGROUND: Severe acute respiratory coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has spread and caused death worldwide. Preventive measures and infection control are underway, and some areas show signs of convergence. Other viruses in addition to SARS-CoV-2 cause cold-like symptoms and spread in the winter. However, the extent to which SARS-CoV-2, influenza viruses and other causative viruses have prevailed since implementing preventive measures is unclear. OBJECTIVES: We aim to investigate the incidence of causative viruses and pathogens in patients. STUDY DESIGN: We collected 191 nasopharyngeal swabs from patients with cold-like symptoms in Japan. All samples were subjected to multiplex PCR with the FilmArray Respiratory Panel and reverse transcription PCR (RT-PCR) to detect SARS-CoV-2. RESULTS: FilmArray Respiratory Panel analysis detected at least one virus in 32 of 191 patients with cold-like symptoms (21 %). Of these, we frequently identified human rhinoviruses/enteroviruses (5.8 %, n=11), human metapneumovirus (3.7 %, n=7), coronavirus 229E (2.1 %, n=4) and coronavirus OC43 (1.6 %, n=3); while no influenza viruses were detected. RT-PCR analysis detected SARS-CoV-2 (4.2 %, n=8) in patients who were not infected with the aforementioned respiratory viruses. CONCLUSIONS: Co-infection with SARS-CoV-2 and other viruses was not observed. Causative viruses remain prevalent after implementing preventive measures. SARS-CoV-2 differs from influenza viruses in its infectivity.

Coinfection/epidemiology , Communicable Disease Control/methods , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Disease Transmission, Infectious/prevention & control , Pandemics/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , Respiratory Tract Infections/epidemiology , Alphacoronavirus/isolation & purification , COVID-19 , Coinfection/virology , Humans , Incidence , Japan , Metapneumovirus/isolation & purification , Multiplex Polymerase Chain Reaction , Nasopharynx/virology , Orthomyxoviridae/isolation & purification , Prospective Studies , Reverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction , Rhinovirus/isolation & purification