Comparison of the Panther Fusion and Allplex assays for the detection of respiratory viruses in clinical samples.

Respiratory viral infections are the most frequent clinical syndrome affecting both children and adults, and early detection is fundamental to avoid infection-related risks and reduce the healthcare costs incurred by unnecessary antibiotic treatments. In this study, performance characteristics of two commercial methods, the Panther Fusion® assay (Hologic Inc., San Diego, CA, USA) were compared to Allplex™ respiratory panels (Seegene, Seoul, South Korea) for the detection of influenza A (Flu A), influenza B (Flu B), respiratory syncytial virus (RSV), parainfluenza virus (PIV), human metapneumovirus (hMPV), rhinovirus (RV) and adenovirus (AdV) targets. A total of 865 specimens collected prospectively and retrospectively were included, and discordant results were further examined using another commercial product, R-GENE™ respiratory kits (bioMérieux, Marcy l'Etoile, France). There was high agreement between both methods, with 98.6% concordance and a kappa (k) value of 0.9 (95% CI: 0.89-0.92). A specific analysis of both methods for each viral agent demonstrated comparable sensitivity and specificity, both ranging from 0.83 to 1 with good predictive values for the prospective part of the study. Good agreement between both methods was also found for the κ values obtained (ranging from 97.55% to 98.9%), with the lowest for hMPV (k = 0.83, 95% CI: 0.75-0.91) and RV (k = 0.73, 95% CI: 0.65-0.81). Amplification efficiency, measured according to the value of the cycle threshold (Ct) obtained in each of the amplifications in both tests, was significantly better with Panther Fusion for Flu A, Flu B, hMPV and RV. Regarding discordant results, R-GENE showed higher agreement with Panther Fusion-positive specimens (negative for Allplex; n = 28/71, 34.9%) than with Allplex-positive samples (negative for Panther Fusion; n = 7/49, 14.3%). In summary, Panther Fusion proved to be a more efficient fully-automated methodology, requiring shorter hands-on and turnaround times than Allplex

Rapid Detection of Herpes Simplex Virus DNA in Genital Ulcers by Real-Time PCR Using SYBR Green I Dye as the Detection Signal

We have evaluated a real-time PCR procedure based on the LightCycler technology for rapid detection of herpes simplex virus (HSV) in genital lesions. Two sets of primers, corresponding to the thymidine kinase and DNA polymerase regions, were used for the amplification reactions in separate capillaries containing the SYBR Green I dye as detection signal. In 28 of 118 samples (24%), HSV was isolated by conventional cell culture. All cell culture-positive samples were also positive by real-time PCR. Six additional cell culture-negative samples were positive by PCR with both sets of primers. Total processing time was less than 3 h. Real-time PCR using SYBR Green I as detection signal is a sensitive procedure for the rapid diagnosis of HSV in genital lesions

Cytomegalovirus infection management in solid organ transplant recipients across European centers in the time of molecular diagnostics: An ESGICH survey

Background: Scant information is available about how transplant centers are managing their use of quantitative molecular testing (QNAT) assays for active cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection monitoring in solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients. The current study was aimed at gathering information on current practices in the management of CMV infection across European centers in the era of molecular testing assays. Methods: A questionnaire-based cross-sectional survey study was conducted by the European Study Group of Infections in Immunocompromised Hosts (ESGICH) of the Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases (ESCMID). The invitation and a weekly reminder with a personal link to an Internet service provider (https://es.surveymonkey.com/) was sent to transplant physicians, transplant infectious diseases specialists, and clinical virologists working at 340 European transplant centers. Results: Of the 1181 specialists surveyed, a total of 173 responded (14.8%): 73 transplant physicians, 57 transplant infectious diseases specialists, and 43 virologists from 173 institutions located at 23 different countries. The majority of centers used QNAT assays for active CMV infection monitoring. Most centers preferred commercially available real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) assays over laboratory-developed procedures for quantifying CMV DNA load in whole blood or plasma. Use of a wide variety of DNA extraction platforms and RT-PCR assays was reported. All programs used antiviral prophylaxis, preemptive therapy, or both, according to current guidelines. However, the centers used different criteria for starting preemptive antiviral treatment, for monitoring systemic CMV DNA load, and for requesting genotypic assays to detect emerging CMV-resistant variants. Conclusions: Significant variation in CMV infection management in SOT recipients still remains across European centers in the era of molecular testing. International multicenter studies are required to achieve commutability of CMV testing and antiviral management procedures