False positive of an immunochromatography kit for detection of norovirus in neonatal feces

Niizuma, Takahiro; Obinata, Kaoru; Ikari, Hiromi; Kamata, Ayako; Lee, Tsubasa; Kinoshita, Keiji; Shimizu, Toshiaki

doi:10.1007/s10156-012-0439-y

Cited by 5 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…11 Similar findings were reported in a NICU where five patients who were positive for norovirus (using an immunochromatographic test with 74% sensitivity and 100% specificity) were all shown to be negative for norovirus when tested using RT-PCR. 12 These data underscore the need for confirmation of infection by molecular assays, in conjunction with rapid detection tests, when diagnosing norovirus infection in the neonatal period.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 87%

Evaluation of rapid immunochromatographic tests for norovirus in neonatal and infant faecal specimens

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 87%

Evaluation of rapid immunochromatographic tests for norovirus in neonatal and infant faecal specimens

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Cross-reactivity is a phenomenon where different antigens from different organisms appear similar and react with the same immune system causing false positive results in the test. Several studies have claimed that both norovirus and rotavirus RDT have no cross-reactivity [5,6,10,[16][17][18][19]. Except one study that found cross-reactivity between norovirus RDT with rotavirus [18].…”

Section: Concerning Truth About Rotavirus and Norovirus' Rdtmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A study of rotavirus rapid tests showed 93.6% sensitivity and 96.17% specificity [8,14,15]. Also, a report of cross-reactivity is rare between rotavirus and norovirus, as mentioned in previous reports [5,6,10,[16][17][18][19]. While the range of accuracy of these kits is still not consistent, physicians can sometimes misunderstand rotavirus and norovirus' rapid diagnostic test as a complete tool for diagnosing patients with gastroenteritis.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 96%

Accuracy and Cross-Reactivity of Rapid Diagnostic Tests for Norovirus and Rotavirus in a Real Clinical Setting

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Rapid diagnostic test (RDT) of norovirus and rotavirus is commonly used for outbreak screening and patient management. Varying accuracy of the test and cross-reactivity has been reported and could affect the outcome of management. The primary purpose of this study is to provide the accuracy of norovirus and rotavirus rapid diagnostic tests and to analyze the cross-reactivity of both tests. Materials and Methods: Stool samples collected from every acute diarrhea patient aged <15 years old who was admitted at

show abstract

“…However, these methods often lack the analytical sensitivity required for detection of such viruses in foods and the environment ( Liu and Moore, 2020 ). Further, such methods can also have high rates of false positive or negative results depending upon the ligand used ( Niizuma et al, 2013 ). The current gold standard for the detection and quantification of foodborne viruses is real time reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Recent Developments in Isothermal Amplification Methods for the Detection of Foodborne Viruses

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Foodborne and enteric viruses continue to impose a significant public health and economic burden globally. As many of these viruses are highly transmissible, the ability to detect them portably, sensitively, and rapidly is critical to reduce their spread. Although still considered a gold standard for detection of these viruses, real time polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-based technologies have limitations such as limited portability, need for extensive sample processing/extraction, and long time to result. In particular, the limitations related to the susceptibility of real time PCR methods to potential inhibitory substances present in food and environmental samples is a continuing challenge, as the need for extensive nucleic acid purification prior to their use compromises the portability and rapidity of such methods. Isothermal amplification methods have been the subject of much investigation for these viruses, as these techniques have been found to be comparable to or better than established PCR-based methods in portability, sensitivity, specificity, rapidity, and simplicity of sample processing. The purpose of this review is to survey and compare reports of these isothermal amplification methods developed for foodborne and enteric viruses, with a special focus on the performance of these methods in the presence of complex matrices.

show abstract

False positive of an immunochromatography kit for detection of norovirus in neonatal feces

Cited by 5 publications

References 9 publications

Evaluation of rapid immunochromatographic tests for norovirus in neonatal and infant faecal specimens

Evaluation of rapid immunochromatographic tests for norovirus in neonatal and infant faecal specimens

Accuracy and Cross-Reactivity of Rapid Diagnostic Tests for Norovirus and Rotavirus in a Real Clinical Setting

Recent Developments in Isothermal Amplification Methods for the Detection of Foodborne Viruses

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About