ADLM Guidance Document on Laboratory Diagnosis of Respiratory Viruses.

Respiratory viral infections are among the most frequent infections experienced worldwide. The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the need for testing and currently several tests are available for the detection of a wide range of viruses. These tests vary widely in terms of the number of viral pathogens included, viral markers targeted, regulatory status, and turnaround time to results, as well as their analytical and clinical performance. Given these many variables, selection and interpretation of testing requires thoughtful consideration. The current guidance document is the authors' expert opinion based on the preponderance of available evidence to address key questions related to best practices for laboratory diagnosis of respiratory viral infections including who to test, when to test, and what tests to use. An algorithm is proposed to help laboratories decide on the most appropriate tests to use for the diagnosis of respiratory viral infections.

Characterization of a novel mouse platelet transfusion model.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Platelet transfusions are increasing with medical advances. Based on FDA criteria, platelet units are assessed by in vitro measures; however, it is not known how platelet processing and storage duration affect function in vivo. Our study's aim was to develop a novel platelet transfusion model stored in mouse plasma that meets FDA criteria adapted to mice, and transfused fresh and stored platelets are detectable in clots in vivo. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Platelet units stored in mouse plasma were prepared using a modified platelet-rich plasma (PRP) collection protocol. Characteristics of fresh and stored units, including pH, cell count, in vitro measures of activity, including activation and aggregation, and post-transfusion recovery (PTR), were determined. Lastly, a tail transection assay was conducted using mice transfused with fresh or stored units, and transfused platelets were identified by confocal imaging. RESULTS: Platelet units had acceptable platelet and white cell counts and were negative for bacterial contamination. Fresh and 1-day stored units had acceptable pH; the platelets were activatable by thrombin and adenosine diphosphate, agreeable with thrombin, had acceptable PTR, and were present in vivo in clots of recipients after tail transection. In contrast, 2-day stored units had clinically unacceptable quality. CONCLUSION: We developed mouse platelets for transfusion analogous to human platelet units using a modified PRP collection protocol with maximum storage of 1 day for an 'old' unit. This provides a powerful tool to test how process modifications and storage conditions affect transfused platelet function in vivo.

Characterization of a Novel Mouse Platelet Transfusion Model.

BACKGROUND: Platelet transfusions are increasing with advances in medical care. Based on FDA criteria, platelet units are assessed by in vitro measures; however, it is not known how platelet processing and storage duration affect function in vivo. To address this, we developed a novel platelet transfusion model that meets FDA criteria adapted to mice, and transfused fresh and stored platelets are detected in clots in vivo. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Platelet units stored in mouse plasma were prepared using a modified platelet rich plasma collection protocol. Characteristics of fresh and stored units, including pH, cell count, in vitro measures of activity, including activation and aggregation, and post-transfusion recovery (PTR), were determined. Lastly, a tail transection assay was conducted using mice transfused with fresh or stored units, and transfused platelets were identified by confocal imaging. RESULTS: Platelet units had acceptable platelet and white cell counts and were negative for bacterial contamination. Fresh and 1-day stored units had acceptable pH; the platelets were activatable by thrombin and ADP, aggregable with thrombin, had acceptable PTR, and were present in vivo in clots of recipients after tail transection. In contrast, 2-day stored units had clinically unacceptable quality. DISCUSSION: We developed mouse platelets for transfusion analogous to human platelet units using a modified platelet rich plasma collection protocol with maximum storage of 1 day for an "old" unit. This provides a powerful tool to test how process modifications and storage conditions affect transfused platelet function in vivo.

Evaluation of a Zoonotic Orthopoxvirus PCR Assay for the Detection of Mpox Virus Infection.

An epidemic caused by an outbreak of mpox (formerly monkeypox) in May 2022 rapidly spread internationally, requiring an urgent response from the clinical diagnostics community. A detailed description of the clinical validation and implementation of a laboratory-developed real-time PCR test for detecting nonvariola Orthopoxvirus-specific DNA based on the newly designed RealStar Zoonotic Orthopoxvirus assay is presented. The validation was performed using an accuracy panel (n = 97) comprising skin lesion swabs in universal transport media and from mpox virus genomic DNA spiked into pooled mpox virus-negative remnant universal transport media of lesion specimens submitted for routine clinical testing in the NewYork-Presbyterian Hospital clinical laboratory system. Accuracy testing demonstrated excellent assay agreement between expected and observed results and comparable diagnostic performance to three different reference tests. Analytical sensitivity with 95% detection probability was 126 copies/mL, and analytical specificity, clinical sensitivity, and clinical specificity were 100%. In summary, the RealStar Zoonotic Orthopoxvirus assay provides a sensitive and reliable method for routine diagnosis of mpox infections.

Assessing respiratory viral exclusion and affinity interactions through co-infection incidence in a pediatric population during the 2022 resurgence of influenza and RSV.

Introduction: In the Northeast US, respiratory viruses such as influenza and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV), which were largely suppressed by COVID-19-related social distancing, made an unprecedented resurgence during 2022, leading to a substantial rise in viral co-infections. However, the relative rates of co-infection with seasonal respiratory viruses over this period have not been assessed. Methods: Here we reviewed multiplex respiratory viral PCR data (BioFire FilmArray™ Respiratory Panel v2.1 [RPP]) from patients with respiratory symptoms presenting to our medical center in New York City to assess co-infection rates of respiratory viruses, which were baselined to total rates of infection for each virus. We examined trends in monthly RPP data from adults and children during November 2021 through December 2022 to capture the full seasonal dynamics of respiratory viruses across periods of low and high prevalence. Results: Of 50,022 RPPs performed for 34,610 patients, 44% were positive for at least one target, and 67% of these were from children. The overwhelming majority of co-infections (93%) were seen among children, for whom 21% of positive RPPs had two or more viruses detected, as compared to just 4% in adults. Relative to children for whom RPPs were ordered, children with co-infections were younger (3.0 vs 4.5 years) and more likely to be seen in the ED or outpatient settings than inpatient and ICU settings. In children, most viral co-infections were found at significantly reduced rates relative to that expected from the incidence of each virus, especially those involving SARS-CoV-2 and influenza. SARS-CoV-2 positive children had an 85%, 65% and 58% reduced rate of co-infection with influenza, RSV, and Rhino/enteroviruses, respectively, after compensating for the incidence of infection with each virus (p< 0.001). Discussion: Our results demonstrate that most respiratory viruses peaked in different months and present in co-infections less than would be expected based on overall rates of infection, suggesting a viral exclusionary effect between most seasonal respiratory viruses, including SARS-CoV-2, influenza and RSV. We also demonstrate the significant burden of respiratory viral co-infections among children. Further work is necessary to understand what predisposes certain patients for viral co-infection despite this exclusionary effect.

Multicenter Evaluation of the BIOFIRE Blood Culture Identification 2 Panel for Detection of Bacteria, Yeasts, and Antimicrobial Resistance Genes in Positive Blood Culture Samples.

Diagnostic tools that can rapidly identify and characterize microbes growing in blood cultures are important components of clinical microbiology practice because they help to provide timely information that can be used to optimize patient management. This publication describes the bioMérieux BIOFIRE Blood Culture Identification 2 (BCID2) Panel clinical study that was submitted to the U.S. Food & Drug Administration. Results obtained with the BIOFIRE BCID2 Panel were compared to standard-of-care (SoC) results, sequencing results, PCR results, and reference laboratory antimicrobial susceptibility testing results to evaluate the accuracy of its performance. Results for 1,093 retrospectively and prospectively collected positive blood culture samples were initially enrolled, and 1,074 samples met the study criteria and were included in the final analyses. The BIOFIRE BCID2 Panel demonstrated an overall sensitivity of 98.9% (1,712/1,731) and an overall specificity of 99.6% (33,592/33,711) for Gram-positive bacteria, Gram-negative bacteria and yeast targets which the panel is designed to detect. One hundred eighteen off-panel organisms, which the BIOFIRE BCID2 Panel is not designed to detect, were identified by SoC in 10.6% (114/1,074) of samples. The BIOFIRE BCID2 Panel also demonstrated an overall positive percent agreement (PPA) of 97.9% (325/332) and an overall negative percent agreement (NPA) of 99.9% (2,465/2,767) for antimicrobial resistance determinants which the panel is designed to detect. The presence or absence of resistance markers in Enterobacterales correlated closely with phenotypic susceptibility and resistance. We conclude that the BIOFIRE BCID2 Panel produced accurate results in this clinical trial.

A case of novel, rapidly-growing Mycolicibacter kumamotonensis infection in a patient with severe pulmonary disease treated in New York City.

INTRODUCTION: Mycolicibacter kumamotonensis is a slowly growing, non-chromogenic non-tuberculous mycobacteria (NTM) that was initially distinguished from the M. terrae complex in 2006. Since then it has been rarely reported as the cause of pulmonary and soft-tissue infections in both immunocompromised and immunocompetent patients. CASE PRESENTATION: We present a case of severe pulmonary disease due to Mycolicibacter kumamotonensis in a 57-year-old male who was immunocompetent at time of diagnosis, with a history of interstitial lung disease and a prior diagnosis of tuberculosis (TB). After initial treatment for TB in 2017, his condition stabilized until a recurrence in September 2021, leading to an evaluation for lung transplant in the setting of pulmonary fibrosis and emphysema which led to the identification of Mycolicibacter kumamotonensis. A lung transplant was completed, and the patient was successfully treated with a combination of Ethambutol, Azithromycin, and Rifabutin. CONCLUSIONS: This represents the first case reported of M. kumamotonensis in a patient undergoing lung transplant, and the first case with rapid culture growth during identification of the organism (4 days). This report highlights the need for consideration of M. kumamotonensis as a pathogen in humans, with the potential for rapid growth in liquid media, and the importance of early identification to inform empiric therapy.

Congenital Tuberculosis After In Vitro Fertilization: A Case for Tuberculosis Screening of Women Evaluated for Infertility.

We report a case of multidrug-resistant congenital tuberculosis (TB) in an infant conceived by in vitro fertilization and review 22 additional infant-mother pairs in the literature. Females evaluated for infertility should be screened for TB risk, and those at risk require a TB-specific diagnostic evaluation before receiving assisted reproductive treatment.

Bacterial Pneumonia and Respiratory Culture Utilization among Hospitalized Patients with and without COVID-19 in a New York City Hospital.

COVID-19 is associated with prolonged hospitalization and a high risk of intubation, which raises concern for bacterial coinfection and antimicrobial resistance. Previous research has shown a wide range of bacterial pneumonia rates for COVID-19 patients in a variety of clinical and demographic settings, but none have compared hospitalized COVID-19 patients to patients testing negative for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) in similar care settings. We performed a retrospective cohort study on hospitalized patients with COVID-19 testing from March 10th, 2020 to December 31st, 2020. A total of 19,219 patients were included, of which 3,796 tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. We found a 2.6-fold increase (P < 0.001) in respiratory culture ordering in COVID-19 patients. On a per-patient basis, COVID-19 patients were 1.5-fold more likely than non-COVID patients to have positive respiratory cultures (46.8% versus 30.9%, P < 0.001), which was primarily driven by patients requiring intubation. Among patients with pneumonia, a significantly higher proportion of COVID-19 patients had ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) relative to non-COVID patients (86.3% versus 70.8%, P < 0.001), but a lower proportion had community-acquired (11.2% vs 25.5%, P < 0.01) pneumonia. There was also a significantly higher proportion of respiratory cultures positive for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, Klebsiella pneumoniae, and antibiotic-resistant organisms in COVID-19 patients. Increased rates of respiratory culture ordering for COVID-19 patients therefore appear to be clinically justified for patients requiring intubation, but further research is needed to understand how SARS-CoV-2 increases the risk of VAP.

Partial ORF1ab Gene Target Failure with Omicron BA.2.12.1.

Mutations in the genome of SARS-CoV-2 can affect the performance of molecular diagnostic assays. In some cases, such as S-gene target failure, the impact can serve as a unique indicator of a particular SARS-CoV-2 variant and provide a method for rapid detection. Here, we describe partial ORF1ab gene target failure (pOGTF) on the cobas SARS-CoV-2 assays, defined by a ≥2-thermocycle delay in detection of the ORF1ab gene compared to that of the E-gene. We demonstrate that pOGTF is 98.6% sensitive and 99.9% specific for SARS-CoV-2 lineage BA.2.12.1, an emerging variant in the United States with spike L452Q and S704L mutations that may affect transmission, infectivity, and/or immune evasion. Increasing rates of pOGTF closely mirrored rates of BA.2.12.1 sequences uploaded to public databases, and, importantly, increasing local rates of pOGTF also mirrored increasing overall test positivity. Use of pOGTF as a proxy for BA.2.12.1 provides faster tracking of the variant than whole-genome sequencing and can benefit laboratories without sequencing capabilities.

Partial ORF1ab Gene Target Failure with Omicron BA.2.12.1.

Mutations in the viral genome of SARS-CoV-2 can impact the performance of molecular diagnostic assays. In some cases, such as S gene target failure, the impact can serve as a unique indicator of a particular SARS-CoV-2 variant and provide a method for rapid detection. Here we describe partial ORF1ab gene target failure (pOGTF) on the cobas ® SARS-CoV-2 assays, defined by a ≥2 thermocycles delay in detection of the ORF1ab gene compared to the E gene. We demonstrate that pOGTF is 97% sensitive and 99% specific for SARS-CoV-2 lineage BA.2.12.1, an emerging variant in the United States with spike L452Q and S704L mutations that may impact transmission, infectivity, and/or immune evasion. Increasing rates of pOGTF closely mirrored rates of BA.2.12.1 sequences uploaded to public databases, and, importantly increasing local rates of pOGTF also mirrored increasing overall test positivity. Use of pOGTF as a proxy for BA.2.12.1 provides faster tracking of the variant than whole-genome sequencing and can benefit laboratories without sequencing capabilities.

Multicenter Evaluation of the BioFire Respiratory Panel 2.1 (RP2.1) for Detection of SARS-CoV-2 in Nasopharyngeal Swab Samples.

As the incidence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) begins to overlap with the traditional respiratory season in the Northern Hemisphere, simultaneous testing for SARS-CoV-2 and the other common causes of respiratory infections is imperative. This has led to the development of multiplex respiratory assays that include SARS-CoV-2 as a target. One such assay is the BioFire respiratory panel 2.1 (RP2.1), which is an expansion of the original BioFire FilmArray respiratory panel 2 (RP2) to include SARS-CoV-2. In this multicenter evaluation, we assessed the performance characteristics of the BioFire RP2.1 for the detection of SARS-CoV-2. One or more targets on the panel were detected in 19.3% (101/524) of specimens tested, with SARS-CoV-2 detected in 12.6% (66/524) of specimens. Human rhinovirus/enterovirus was also detected in 32.7% (33/101) and adenovirus in 3.0% (3/101) of positive specimens, with one dual positive for both SARS-CoV-2 and adenovirus being detected. A further breakdown of pathogens by age revealed a 4-fold predominance of human rhinovirus/enterovirus in subjects 0 to 18 years of age, whereas in all other age groups, SARS-CoV-2 was clearly the predominant pathogen. Overall, SARS-CoV-2 results obtained from the BioFire RP2.1 were highly concordant with the composite result, exhibiting 98.4% (61/62) positive percent agreement (95% confidence interval [CI], 91.4 to 99.7%) and 98.9% (457/462) negative percent agreement (95% CI, 97.5 to 99.5%) with further analysis of discordant results suggesting that the concentration of SARS-CoV-2 in the specimens was near the limit of detection (LoD) for both the BioFire RP2.1 and the comparator assays. Overall, the BioFire RP2.1 exhibited excellent performance in the detection of SARS-CoV-2.

Evaluation of the Alinity m Resp-4-Plex Assay for the Detection of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2, Influenza A Virus, Influenza B Virus, and Respiratory Syncytial Virus.

The rapid emergence of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has introduced a new challenge in diagnosing and differentiating respiratory infections. Accurate diagnosis of respiratory infections, including severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), is complicated by overlapping symptomology, and stepwise approaches to testing for each infection would lead to increased reagent usage and cost, as well as delays in clinical interventions. To avoid these issues, multiplex molecular assays have been developed to differentiate between respiratory viruses in a single test to meet clinical diagnostic needs. To evaluate the analytical performance of the FDA emergency use authorization (EUA)-approved Abbott Alinity m resp-4-plex assay (Alinity m) in testing for SARS-CoV-2, influenza A virus, influenza B virus, and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV), we compared its performance to those of both the EUA-approved Cepheid Xpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2, influenza A/B virus, and RSV assay (Xpert Xpress) and the EUA-approved Roche Cobas SARS-CoV-2 and influenza A/B virus assay (Cobas) in a single-center retrospective analysis. High concordance was observed among all three assays, with kappa statistics showing an almost perfect agreement (>0.90). The limit of detection (LOD) results for SARS-CoV-2 showed the Alinity m exhibiting the lowest LOD at 26 copies/mL, followed by the Cobas at 58 copies/mL and the Xpert Xpress at 83 copies/mL, with LOD results for the influenza A virus, influenza B virus, and RSV viral targets also showing equivalent or better performance on the Alinity m compared to the other two platforms. The Alinity m can be used as a high-volume testing platform for SARS-CoV-2, influenza A virus, influenza B virus, and RSV and exhibits analytical performance comparable to those of both the Xpert Xpress and Cobas assays. IMPORTANCE The rapid emergence of SARS-CoV-2 has introduced a new challenge in diagnosing and differentiating respiratory infections, especially considering the overlapping symptomology of many of these infections and differences in clinical interventions depending on the pathogen identified. To avoid these issues, multiplex molecular assays like the one described in this article need to be developed to differentiate between the most common respiratory pathogens in a single test and most effectively meet clinical diagnostic needs.

Development of the RealTime SARS-CoV-2 quantitative Laboratory Developed Test and correlation with viral culture as a measure of infectivity.

While diagnosis of COVID-19 relies on qualitative molecular testing for the absence or presence of SARS-CoV-2 RNA, quantitative viral load determination for SARS-CoV-2 has many potential applications in antiviral therapy and vaccine trials as well as implications for public health and quarantine guidance. To date, no quantitative SARS-CoV-2 viral load tests have been authorized for clinical use by the FDA. In this study, we modified the FDA emergency use authorized qualitative RealTime SARS-CoV-2 assay into a quantitative SARS-CoV-2 Laboratory Developed Test (LDT) using newly developed Abbott SARS-CoV-2 calibration standards. Both analytical and clinical performance of this SARS-CoV-2 quantitative LDT was evaluated using nasopharyngeal swabs (NPS). We further assessed the correlation between Ct and the ability to culture virus on Vero CCL81 cells. The SARS-CoV-2 quantitative LDT demonstrated high linearity with R2 value of 0.992, high inter- and intra-assay reproducibility across the dynamic range (SDs ± 0.08-0.14 log10 copies/mL for inter-assay reproducibility and ± 0.09 to 0.19 log10 copies/mL for intra-assay reproducibility). Lower limit of detection was determined as 1.90 log10 copies/mL. The highest Ct at which CPE was detected ranged between 28.21-28.49, corresponding to approximately 4.2 log10 copies/mL. Quantitative tests, validated against viral culture capacity, may allow more accurate identification of individuals with and without infectious viral shedding from the respiratory tract.

Evaluating the Effect of a Modified Sample Preparation on SARS-CoV-2 Detection in a Cartridge-Based Platform.

INTRODUCTION: The ePlex® SARS-CoV-2 emergency use authorization (EUA) test is a cartridge-based assay for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 in nasopharyngeal specimens. Since performance data has been previously published on this platform, the manufacturer has modified the workflow design in order to improve assay performance. Evaluation of the new workflow, which eliminated the sample delivery device (SDD), led to a dramatic improvement of assay performance while saving time and making cartridge loading more convenient. METHODS: 145 confirmed positive nasopharyngeal swab specimens were used to evaluate the assay analytical sensitivity, accuracy, and overall time-saving for the 2 workflows that is with and without the use of SDD on the ePlex SARS-CoV-2 test. RESULTS: Elimination of the SDD step led to a dramatic increase in accuracy and the overall limit of detection when using 145 previously defined and valid SARS-CoV-2 positive specimens with relatively low, medium, and high cycle thresholds (CT). This simple workflow change led to an overall detection from 94/145 (64.8%) to 131/145 (90.3%), with an additional 37 specimens being detected. CT value ranges revealed that 90% of the specimens in the 33 ≤ CT < 35.3 CT range were detected, whereas with the SDD workflow, only 30% of positive specimens were detected in this same range. Hands-on time for each specimen also improved and showed overall time savings. CONCLUSION: The simple workflow modification eliminating the SDD led to an overall improvement in the detection of positive specimens and also simplified workflow and reduced hands-on time.

Herpes Simplex Virus-1 and -2 Rapid Detection in Whole Blood.

BACKGROUND: Disseminated herpes simplex virus (HSV) infection has high morbidity and mortality, particularly in neonates, and requires rapid diagnosis for proper treatment. Currently, there are no US FDA-approved assays available to perform HSV testing on blood. OBJECTIVES: Our goal was to evaluate the analytical sensitivity and clinical performance of an available sample-to-answer real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR) platform used as a laboratory-developed test (LDT) for the detection of HSV-1 and -2 in whole blood (WB). METHODS: A clinical comparison study comparing a real-time PCR reference assay to a LDT based on the DiaSorin Simplexa Direct assay kit was performed. Analytical sensitivity studies comparing WB to the FDA-approved specimen type, cerebrospinal fluid (CSF), were also conducted with contrived quantified HSV-1 and -2 samples in WB and CSF matrix. RESULTS: In total, 102 samples were tested using the LDT and reference assay for the clinical correlation study, with 91 negative and 10 positive results for HSV-1 (n = 7) and HSV-2 (n = 3), exhibiting 100% concordance with comparator results. The overall limit of detection (LoD) for HSV-1 and HSV-2 in WB was comparable to that seen in CSF, with the calculated 95% LoD for blood being 1489 ± 16 copies/ml for HSV-1 and 1187 ± 18 copies/ml for HSV-2 and for CSF being 1168 ± 17 copies/ml for HSV-1 and 953 ± 21 copies/ml for HSV-2. CONCLUSIONS: The performance of the LDT for detection of HSV-1 and HSV-2 in WB specimens is adequate for clinical use. The LoD for HSV-1 and HSV-2 is comparable to that in CSF, the FDA-approved specimen type.

3-Dimensional Printed Alternative to the Standard Synthetic Flocked Nasopharyngeal Swabs Used for Coronavirus Disease 2019 Testing.

BACKGROUND: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the virus that causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), can be detected in respiratory samples by real-time reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) or other molecular methods. Accessibility of diagnostic testing for COVID-19 has been limited by intermittent shortages of supplies required for testing, including flocked nasopharyngeal (FLNP) swabs. METHODS: We developed a 3-dimensional printed nasopharyngeal (3DP) swab as a replacement of the FLNP swab. The performance of 3DP and FLNP swabs were compared in a clinical trial of symptomatic patients at 3 clinical sites (n = 291) using 3 SARS-CoV-2 emergency use authorization tests: a modified version of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel and 2 commercial automated formats, Roche Cobas and NeuMoDx. RESULTS: The cycle threshold-C(t)-values from the gene targets and the RNase P gene control in the CDC assay showed no significant differences between swabs for both gene targets (P = .152 and P = .092), with the RNase P target performing significantly better in the 3DP swabs (P < .001). The C(t) values showed no significant differences between swabs for both viral gene targets in the Roche cobas assay (P = .05 and P = .05) as well as the NeuMoDx assay (P = .401 and P = .484). The overall clinical correlation of COVID-19 diagnosis between all methods was 95.88% (Kappa 0.901). CONCLUSIONS: The 3DP swabs were equivalent to standard FLNP in 3 testing platforms for SARS-CoV-2. Given the need for widespread testing, 3DP swabs printed onsite are an alternate to FLNP that can rapidly scale in response to acute needs when supply chain disruptions affect availability of collection kits.

Estimating the predictive value of negative severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) results: A prospective study.

We performed a prospective study of 501 patients, regardless of symptoms, admitted to the hospital, to estimate the predictive value of a negative nasopharyngeal swab for severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). At a positivity rate of 10.2%, the estimated negative predictive value (NPV) was 97.2% and the NPV rose as prevalence decreased during the study.

Multicenter Evaluation of the Cepheid Xpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2/Flu/RSV Test.

With the approach of respiratory virus season in the Northern Hemisphere, clinical microbiology and public health laboratories will need rapid diagnostic assays to distinguish severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) from influenza virus and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) infections for diagnosis and surveillance. In this study, the clinical performance of the Xpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2/Flu/RSV test (Cepheid, Sunnyvale, CA, USA) for nasopharyngeal swab specimens was evaluated in four centers: Johns Hopkins Medical Microbiology Laboratory, Northwell Health Laboratories, NYC Public Health Laboratory, and Los Angeles County/University of Southern California (LAC+USC) Medical Center. A total of 319 nasopharyngeal swab specimens, positive for SARS-CoV-2 (n = 75), influenza A virus (n = 65), influenza B virus (n = 50), or RSV (n = 38) or negative (n = 91) by the standard-of-care nucleic acid amplification tests at each site, were tested using the Cepheid panel test. The overall positive percent agreement for the SARS-CoV-2 target was 98.7% (n = 74/75), and the negative agreement was 100% (n = 91), with all other analytes showing 100% total agreement (n = 153). Standard-of-care tests to which the Cepheid panel was compared included the Cepheid Xpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2, Cepheid Xpert Xpress Flu/RSV, GenMark ePlex respiratory panel, BioFire respiratory panel 2.1 and v1.7, DiaSorin Simplexa COVID-19 Direct, and Hologic Panther Fusion SARS-CoV-2 assays. The Xpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2/Flu/RSV test showed high sensitivity and accuracy for all analytes included in the test. This test will provide a valuable clinical diagnostic and public health solution for detecting and differentiating SARS-CoV-2, influenza A and B virus, and RSV infections during the current respiratory virus season.