Evaluation of the Hexaplex Assay for Detection of Respiratory Viruses in Children

Abstract

The Hexaplex assay (Prodesse, Inc., Milwaukee, Wis.) is a multiplex reverse transcriptase (RT)-PCR assay for the detection of parainfluenza virus types 1, 2, and 3, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) types A and B, and influenza virus types A and B. We evaluated the Hexaplex assay in comparison with conventional viral cell cultures and rapid enzyme immunoassays (EIAs) for RSV (Directigen; Becton Dickinson Inc., Cockeysville, Md.) and influenza A virus (Abbott Test Pack; Abbott Laboratories, Abbott Park, Ill.) for the detection of respiratory viruses from pediatric respiratory specimens obtained from children seen at Children's Hospital of Wisconsin from December 1997 through May 1998. A total of 363 respiratory specimens were evaluated. The tissue culture prevalence of parainfluenza virus during this period of time was low (1.1%). The sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive value of Hexaplex compared to tissue culture for the detection of parainfluenza virus were 100, 95.8, 19.0, and 100%, respectively. Only one specimen was determined to contain influenza B virus by Hexaplex; it was tissue culture negative. A specimen was considered to contain RSV or influenza A virus when it was either culture positive or culture negative but Hexaplex and EIA positive. Prior to the analysis of discrepant results, the sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive value for the detection of RSV were 91.2, 100, 100, and 98.0%, respectively, for tissue culture; 84.5, 100, 100, and 96.6% for EIA; and 98.5, 91.5, 72.8, and 99.6% for Hexaplex, respectively. The sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive value for the detection of influenza A virus prior to the analysis of discrepant results were 100, 100, 100, and 100%, respectively, for culture, 78.0, 100, 100, and 89.4% for EIA, respectively, and 95.1, 94.1, 67.2, and 99.3% for Hexaplex, respectively. Culture-and/or EIA-negative, Hexaplex-positive specimens were analyzed by a second RT-PCR assay which used primers specific for a different genomic region than that used in the Hexaplex assay. After analysis of these discrepant results, the sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive value for the detection of RSV were 74.3, 100, 100, and 93.5%, respectively, for tissue culture; 70.3, 100, 100, and 92.5% for EIA; and 98.6, 97.4, 91.2, and 99.6% for Hexaplex. The sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive value for the detection of influenza A virus were 83.3, 100, 100, and 97.4%, respectively, for tissue culture; 69.4, 100, 100, and 83.3% for EIA; and 95.8, 98.7, 92.0, and 99.3% for Hexaplex. Hexaplex is a rapid, sensitive, and specific method for the detection of the seven most common respiratory viruses in children. Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) types A and B, influenza virus types A (Flu A) and B (Flu B), and parainfluenza virus (PIV) types 1, 2, and 3 are the leading cause of viral lower respiratory tract infections in children (18,22,24). Many other viruses, including adenovirus,...

Stable and Noncompetitive RNA Internal Control for Routine Clinical Diagnostic Reverse Transcription-PCR

“…Three coinfections were identified. This represented 0.92% of the total and is fewer than the numbers reported in many studies that have used RT-PCR (9,12). However, the coamplification of all target amplicons from plasmids containing cloned amplicons (Fig.…”

The natural history of respiratory syncytial virus infection in cancer and transplant patients: implications for management

“…This figure may, in fact, represent an underestimate, given the lower sensitivity of RSV cultures compared with polymerase chain reaction (PCR). 21 Most important, the rate of respiratory complications among patients whose nasal cultures yielded RSV did not significantly differ from that of patients who were RSV-negative, although a post hoc analysis did reveal a higher rate of tracheobronchitis and hypoxemia among the former patients. Univariate and multivariate analyses failed to identify positive RSV culture as a risk factor for respiratory complications.…”

A Sensitive, Specific, and Cost-Effective Multiplex Reverse Transcriptase-PCR Assay for the Detection of Seven Common Respiratory Viruses in Respiratory Samples

“…DFA detection is more rapid but less sensitive than viral culture, and results may be affected by specimen quality (ie, presence of intact, infected cells), virus type, and interpretation of a positive result, which is subjective and requires a great deal of technical skill. 2,[7][8][9][10] DFA is also unable to detect minor variations in amino acid sequence on envelope or capsid proteins. 11 Viral culture is still considered the "gold standard" for respiratory virus detection, but is limited by a prolonged result turnaround time (ie, 2 days to 1 week) and is dependent on stringent specimen transport and storage conditions to preserve the infectivity of the virus.…”

“…11 Viral culture is still considered the "gold standard" for respiratory virus detection, but is limited by a prolonged result turnaround time (ie, 2 days to 1 week) and is dependent on stringent specimen transport and storage conditions to preserve the infectivity of the virus. 9,[12][13][14][15] Although the combination of both these techniques can provide an increase in the number of positive results, a significant proportion of specimens still remain negative, despite clinical suspicion of viral infection. 8 Several studies have shown that polymerase chain reaction (PCR) amplification can resolve the intrinsic limitations associated with traditional diagnostic techniques by combining increased sensitivity, specificity, and rapid result turnaround time.…”