Molecular point-of-care testing for influenza A/B and respiratory syncytial virus: comparison of workflow parameters for the ID Now and cobas Liat systems

Young, Stephen; Phillips, Jamie E.; Griego-Fullbright, Christen; Wagner, Aaron; Jim, Patricia; Chaudhuri, Sheena; Tang, Shaowu; Sickler, Joanna

doi:10.1101/19008227

Cited by 5 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Liat SARS-CoV-2 Manuscript JCM submission 19NOV2020 performance for influenza A/B detection as well as overall assay workflow and field usability were established in previous studies (10)(11)(12) (10,11,13,14).…”

Section: Downloaded Frommentioning

confidence: 99%

Clinical Performance of the Point-of-Care cobas Liat for Detection of SARS-CoV-2 in 20 Minutes: a Multicenter Study

et al. 2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Highly accurate testing for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) at the point of care (POC) is an unmet diagnostic need in emergency care and time-sensitive outpatient care settings. Reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) technology is the gold-standard for SARS-CoV-2 diagnostics. Methods: We performed a multi-site United States (US) study comparing the clinical performance of the first US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) authorized POC RT-PCR test for detection of SARS-CoV-2 in 20 minutes, the cobas® Liat SARS-CoV-2 & Influenza A/B nucleic acid test, to the most widely used RT-PCR laboratory test, the cobas® 68/8800 SARS-CoV-2 test. Results: Clinical nasopharyngeal swab specimens from 444 patients with 357 evaluable specimens at five US clinical laboratories were enrolled from September 21, 2020 to October 23, 2020. The overall agreement between the Liat and 68/8800 systems for SARS-CoV-2 diagnostics was 98.6% (352/357). Using Liat, positive percent agreement for SARS-CoV-2 was 100% (162/162) and the negative percent agreement was 97.4% (190/195). Conclusion: The Liat is an RT-PCR POC test that provides highly accurate SARS-CoV-2 results in 20 minutes with equivalent performance to high-throughput laboratory molecular testing. Rapid RT-PCR testing at the POC can enable more timely infection control and individual care decisions for Coronavirus Disease 2019.

show abstract

Section: Downloaded Frommentioning

confidence: 99%

Clinical Performance of the Point-of-Care cobas Liat for Detection of SARS-CoV-2 in 20 Minutes: a Multicenter Study

et al. 2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Point-of-care assays are obviously attractive for their rapidity of results; however, these assays require further validation, as published studies involve only small numbers of patients. Sample-to-answer molecular diagnostic platforms have been granted FDA emergency use authorization, but there is concern that they are limited in analytic and clinical performance (17,18). Other assays include a reverse transcription-loop-mediated isothermal amplification method (19), and antibody-based rapid serologic testing (20).…”

Section: Point-of-care Testingmentioning

confidence: 99%

COVID-19 Testing in Patients with Cancer: Does One Size Fit All?

Madariaga

McMullen

Sheikh

et al. 2020

Clinical Cancer Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The COVID-19 global pandemic has drastically impacted cancer care, posing challenges in treatment and diagnosis. There is increasing evidence that cancer patients, particularly those who have advanced age, significant comorbidities, metastatic disease, and/or are receiving active immunosuppressive therapy may be at higher risk of COVID-19 severe complications. Controlling viral spread from asymptomatic carriers in cancer centers is paramount, and appropriate screening methods need to be established. Universal testing of asymptomatic cancer patients may be key to ensure safe continuation of treatment and appropriate hospitalized patients cohorting during the pandemic. Here we perform a comprehensive review of the available evidence regarding SARS-CoV-2 testing in asymptomatic cancer patients, and describe the approach adopted at Princess Margaret Cancer Centre (Toronto, Canada) as a core component of COVID-19 control.

show abstract

“…Young et al compared the turnaround time for two commercial brands of rapid tests for influenza A and B and RSV. The turnaround time for the ID NOW RSV assay and the ID NOW Influenza A and B assay was 6.4–15.8 min per test result vs 21.3–22.0 min for the combined cobas Influenza A/B & RSV Assay (40). In addition to considering ‘time to result’ for multiplex tests, users should also pay close attention to hands-on time when implementing a new assay.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Healthcare professionals should assess the benefits and drawbacks of each RSV testing method and decide which would be most appropriate in their practice. Factors to consider include the site of testing, the location of the testing instrument, the age and immune status of the individual being tested, end user of the test, where the test results will be analyzed, the clinical significance of the results, implications for infection control, and the added value of a combination test result (40, 42).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Diagnostic Accuracy of Commercially Available Tests for Respiratory Syncytial Virus: A Scoping Literature Review in the COVID-19 Era

Bernstein¹,

Mejías

Rath

et al. 2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Non-pharmaceutical interventions to prevent the spread of coronavirus disease 2019 also decreased the spread of respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) and influenza. Viral diagnostic testing in patients with respiratory tract infections (RTI) is a necessary tool for patient management; therefore, sensitive and specific tests are required. This scoping literature review evaluated the analytical validity of commercially available sample-to-answer RSV diagnostic tests in different contexts. Content: PubMed and Embase were queried for studies reporting on the analytical validity of tests for RSV in patients with RTI (published January 2005–January 2021). Sensitivity and specificity of RSV tests and information on study design, patient, and setting characteristics were extracted from 77 studies that met predefined inclusion criteria. A literature gap was identified for studies of RSV tests conducted in adult-only populations (5.3% of total sub-records), and in outpatient (7.5%) or household (0.8%) settings. Overall, RSV tests with analytical time >30 min had higher sensitivity (62.5–100%) versus RSV tests with analytical time ≤30 min (25.7–100%), this sensitivity range could be partially attributed to the different modalities (antigen versus molecular) used. Molecular-based rapid RSV tests had higher sensitivity (66.7–100%) and specificity (94.3–100%) than antigen-based RSV tests (25.7–100% and 80.3–100%). Summary: Molecular-based RSV tests should be considered for first-line use when possible, given their high sensitivity and specificity and that adults with RTI typically have low viral load, necessitating a highly sensitive test. This review benefits healthcare professionals by summarizing the diagnostic accuracy data available for commercially available RSV tests.

show abstract

Molecular point-of-care testing for influenza A/B and respiratory syncytial virus: comparison of workflow parameters for the ID Now and cobas Liat systems

Cited by 5 publications

References 17 publications

Clinical Performance of the Point-of-Care cobas Liat for Detection of SARS-CoV-2 in 20 Minutes: a Multicenter Study

Clinical Performance of the Point-of-Care cobas Liat for Detection of SARS-CoV-2 in 20 Minutes: a Multicenter Study

COVID-19 Testing in Patients with Cancer: Does One Size Fit All?

Diagnostic Accuracy of Commercially Available Tests for Respiratory Syncytial Virus: A Scoping Literature Review in the COVID-19 Era

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About