Evaluation of Seegene Allplex Respiratory Panel 1 kit for the detection of influenza virus and human respiratory syncytial virus

Evaluation of the Seegene AllplexTM RV Master Assay for One-Step Simultaneous Detection of Eight Respiratory Viruses in Nasopharyngeal Specimens

BACKGROUND

The Seegene AllplexTM RV Master (RVM) assay is a one-step multiplex real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) system for detecting eight viral respiratory pathogens from nasopharyngeal swab, aspirate, and bronchoalveolar lavage specimens. The eight RVM targets are: severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), Influenza A (Flu A), Influenza B (Flu B), Human respiratory syncytial virus (RSV), adenovirus (AdV), rhinovirus (HRV), parainfluenza virus (PIV), and metapneumovirus (MPV). The assay is based on Seegene's multiple detection temperature (MuDT) technology and provides cycle threshold (Ct) values for each of its viral targets upon PCR completion.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to evaluate the diagnostic performance of the RVM assay by calculating sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, Positive Predictive Value (PPV), Negative Predictive Value (NPV), Positive Percent Agreement (PPA), Negative Percent Agreement (NPA), and Overall Percent Agreement (OPA) compared to definite diagnosis and analogous reference assays.

STUDY DESIGN

Diagnostic sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, PPV, and NPV were calculated by comparing the results of the RVM assay to that of definite diagnosis assays; while PPA, NPA, and OPA were calculated by comparing results of the RVM assay to that of analogous reference products. Definite diagnosis and reference methods comprised whole genome sequencing and PCR genotyping, the AllplexTM SARS-CoV-2/FluA/FluB/RSV and Respiratory Panels 1, 2, and 3 assays (Seegene), and the Xpert® Xpress SARS-CoV-2/FluA/FluB/RSV Plus assay (Cepheid). Reproducibility of the RVM assay using fully-automated and semi-automated nucleic acid (NA) extraction workflows and as performed by independent operators was also assessed. In total, 249 positive respiratory specimens and at least 50 negative specimens for each target tested were used for this evaluation study.

RESULTS

Sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, PPV, NPV, PPA, NPA, and OPA ranged from 95.7% to 100% for detecting all eight targets tested on the RVM assay. Reproducibility PPA, NPA, and OPA between automated and semi-automated NA extraction workflows were all >97.9%, while the reproducibility PPA, NPA and OPA between independent operators were all 100%.

CONCLUSION

These results demon6strate a high level of sensitivity, specificity, accuracy and diagnostic predictive value of the RVM assay and high agreement with comparable reference assays in identifying all eight of its targets. Taken together, our study underscores the diagnostic utility of the RVM assay in detecting eight viral respiratory pathogens.

Circulation and Seasonality of Respiratory Viruses in Hospitalized Patients during Five Consecutive Years (2019-2023) in Perugia, Italy

The emergence of SARS-CoV-2 and the non-pharmacological interventions adopted to counter its spread appear to have led to changes in the normal circulation and seasonality of respiratory viruses. Our study aims to investigate changes related to the circulation of respiratory viruses, not SARS-CoV-2, among hospitalized patients in Perugia, Central Italy, between 2019 and 2023. The samples were collected from individuals who went to the emergency room (ER) or were hospitalized and analyzed using a molecular multiplex test. The results underline that non-pharmaceutical interventions altered the typical seasonal circulation patterns of different respiratory viruses. Those mostly affected were enveloped viruses like influenza viruses that disappeared in 2021; the least impact was recorded for Rhinovirus, which was detected during the pandemic period, maintaining the same seasonality observed in the pre-pandemic period although with a reduction in the number of positive samples. Our data underline the importance of the continuous monitoring of these viruses, especially to understand the timing with which prevention measures, not only non-pharmacological interventions but also the equipment of vaccine doses and monoclonal antibodies, should be adopted to reduce their circulation, particularly in the population at risk of developing severe forms of lower respiratory tract infection.

Epidemiology and molecular characteristics of respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) among italian community-dwelling adults, 2021/22 season

BACKGROUND

Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) is a leading cause of acute respiratory infections worldwide. While historically RSV research has been focused on children, data on RSV infection in adults are limited. The goal of this study was to establish the prevalence of RSV in community-dwelling Italian adults and analyze its genetic variability during the 2021/22 winter season.

METHODS

In this cross-sectional study, a random sample of naso-/oropharyngeal specimens from symptomatic adults seeking for SARS-CoV-2 molecular testing between December 2021 and March 2022 were tested for RSV and other respiratory pathogens by means of reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction. RSV-positive samples were further molecularly characterized by sequence analysis.

RESULTS

Of 1,213 samples tested, 1.6% (95% CI: 0.9-2.4%) were positive for RSV and subgroups A (44.4%) and B (55.6%) were identified in similar proportions. The epidemic peak occurred in December 2021, when the RSV prevalence was as high as 4.6% (95% CI: 2.2-8.3%). The prevalence of RSV detection was similar (p = 0.64) to that of influenza virus (1.9%). All RSV A and B strains belonged to the ON1 and BA genotypes, respectively. Most (72.2%) RSV-positive samples were also positive for other pathogens being SARS-CoV-2, Streptococcus pneumoniae and rhinovirus the most frequent. RSV load was significantly higher among mono-detections than co-detections.

CONCLUSION

During the 2021/22 winter season, characterized by the predominant circulation of SARS-CoV-2 and some non-pharmaceutical containment measures still in place, a substantial proportion of Italian adults tested positive for genetically diversified strains of both RSV subtypes. In view of the upcoming registration of vaccines, establishment of the National RSV surveillance system is urgently needed.

Rapid differential diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2, influenza A/B and respiratory syncytial viruses: Validation of a novel RT-PCR assay

BACKGROUND

Influenza and respiratory syncytial (RSV) viruses are expected to co-circulate with SARS-CoV-2 in the upcoming seasons and clinical differential diagnosis between them is difficult. Laboratory-based RT-PCR is a gold standard diagnostic method for influenza, RSV and SARS-CoV-2. The objective of this study was to estimate the diagnostic performance of a novel point-of-care RT-PCR assay STANDARD M10 Flu/RSV/SARS-CoV-2 (SD Biosensor) in a large number of clinical specimens with diversified (co)-infection patterns and viral loads.

METHODS

This was a retrospective study, in which all samples were tested in both STANDARD M10 Flu/RSV/SARS-CoV-2 index and Allplex SARS-CoV-2/Respiratory Panel 1 (Seegene) reference kits. Samples with discordant results were further processed in a third resolver test (Resp-4-Plex, Abbott).

RESULTS

A total of 1,019 naso-/oropharyngeal samples (50.3% positive for at least one virus) were processed in both STANDARD M10 Flu/RSV/SARS-CoV-2 and Allplex assays and the overall between-assay agreement was as high as 94.6%. Positive percent agreement of the STANDARD M10 Flu/RSV/SARS-CoV-2 was 100%, 96.6%, 97.3% and 99.4% for influenza A, B, RSV and SARS-CoV-2, respectively. The corresponding negative percent agreement was 99.7%. 100%, 100% and 98.4%, respectively. The expected positive and negative predictive values for all viruses were constantly above 96% in a reasonable range of disease prevalence.

CONCLUSIONS

STANDARD M10 Flu/RSV/SARS-CoV-2 is a reliable RT-PCR assay able to detect influenza A, influenza B, RSV and SARS-CoV-2 in one hour or less, fostering a rapid differential diagnosis of common respiratory viruses.

Analytical performances of the AMPLIQUICK® Respiratory Triplex assay for simultaneous detection and differentiation of SARS-CoV-2, influenza A/B and respiratory syncytial viruses in respiratory specimens

Although patients infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), influenza A, influenza B and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) show comparable or very similar manifestations, the therapeutic approaches of these respiratory viral infections are different, which requires an accurate diagnosis. Recently, the novel multiplex real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction assay AMPLIQUICK® Respiratory Triplex (BioSynex SA, Illkirch-Graffenstaden, France) allows simultaneous detection and differentiation of SARS-CoV-2, influenza A, influenza B, and RSV in respiratory tract samples. We herein evaluated the performance of the AMPLIQUICK® Respiratory Triplex for the detection of the four viruses in respiratory specimens, using Allplex™ Respiratory Panel 1 and 2019-nCoV assays (Seegene, Seoul, Korea) as reference comparator assays. A total of 359 archived predetermined respiratory samples, including 83, 145, 19 and 95 positive specimens for SARS-CoV-2, influenza A, influenza B and RSV respectively, were included. The AMPLIQUICK® Respiratory Triplex showed high concordance with the reference assays, with an overall agreement for SARS-CoV-2, influenza A, influenza B, and RSV at 97.6%, 98.8%, 98.3% and 100.0%, respectively, and high κ values ranging from 0.93 to 1.00, indicating an almost perfect agreement between assays. Furthermore, high correlations of cycle threshold (Ct) values were observed for positive samples of the four viruses between the AMPLIQUICK® Respiratory Triplex and comparator assays, with an overall high agreement between Ct values assessed by Bland-Altman analyses. In conclusion, these observations demonstrate that the multiplex AMPLIQUICK® Respiratory Triplex is a reliable assay for the qualitative detection and differentiation of SARS-CoV-2, influenza A, influenza B, and RSV in respiratory specimens, which may prove useful for streamlining diagnostics during the winter influenza-seasons.

Comparative Evaluation of Allplex Respiratory Panels 1, 2, 3, and BioFire FilmArray Respiratory Panel for the Detection of Respiratory Infections

Multiplex nucleic acid amplification assays that simultaneously detect multiple respiratory pathogens in a single nasopharyngeal swab (NPS) specimen are widely used for rapid clinical diagnostics. We evaluated Allplex Respiratory Panel (RP) 1, 2, 3, and the BioFire FilmArray RP assay for detecting respiratory pathogens from NPS specimens. In all, 181 NPS specimens obtained from patients suspected of having respiratory infections during the non-influenza season (August–December 2019) were included. The Allplex RP 1, 2, and 3 detected 154 samples positive for respiratory viruses, whereas the BioFire FilmArray detected viruses in 98 samples. Co-infection with two or more viruses was detected in 41 and 17 NPS specimens by Allplex RP and the BioFire FilmArray RP, respectively. For adenoviruses, Allplex RP 1 detected 31 specimens, compared to 34 by the BioFire FilmArray. In all, 64 NPS specimens were positive for human enterovirus (HEV) and human rhinovirus (HRV) on the Allplex RP, in contrast to 39 HEV/HRV on the BioFire FilmArray. The parainfluenza virus (PIV-1–4) detection rate differed between the two systems. Most discrepant results were observed for NPS specimens with high cycle threshold values obtained by Allplex RP. This study showed concordant performance of the Allplex RP 1, 2, 3, and the BioFire FilmArray RP for the simultaneous detection of multiple respiratory viruses.

Comparative practicability and analytical performances of Credo VitaPCR™ Flu A&B and Cepheid Xpert® Xpress Flu/RSV platforms

To compare the practicability (usability and satisfaction) and analytical performances of VitaPCR™ Flu A&B Assay (Credo Diagnostics Biomedical Pte. Ltd., Singapore, Republic of Singapore) and Xpert® Xpress Flu/RSV kit (Cepheid, Sunnyvale, USA), two rapid point-of-care (POC) nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) by reference to multiplex RT-PCR for respiratory viruses. Nasopharyngeal swabs (n=117) were collected from patients with influenza-like illness in Paris, France. Thawed specimens were further analyzed with both NAATs. The usability was comparable for both NAATs. Satisfaction questionnaire was better for the VitaPCR™ platform for the short time of test result in 20 minutes. Both NAATs showed comparable sensitivities (VitaPCR^TM: 95.0%; Xpert® Xpress: 97.5%) and specificities (100%) for influenza A/B RNA detection, with excellent reliability and accuracy between both NAATs. Both VitaPCR™ and Xpert® Xpress NAATs can be implemented in hospital setting as POC NAATs to rapidly detect influenza A/B RNA in symptomatic patients.

Structural Mapping of Mutations in Spike, RdRp and Orf3a Genes of SARS-CoV-2 in Influenza Like Illness (ILI) Patients

In December 2019, the emergence of SARS-CoV-2 virus in China led to a pandemic. Since both Influenza Like Illness (ILI) and COVID-19 case definitions overlap, we re-investigated the ILI cases using PCR for the presence of SARS-CoV-2 in 739 nasopharyngeal swabs collected from November 2019 to March 2020. SARS-CoV-2 RNA was found in 37 samples (5%) collected mostly during February 2020. It was followed by confirmation of evolutionary and spatial relationships using next generation sequencing (NGS). We observed that the overall incidence of ILI cases during 2019-2020 influenza season was considerably higher than previous years and was gradually replaced with SARS-CoV-2, which indicated a silent transmission among ambulatory patients. Sequencing of representative isolates confirmed independent introductions and silent transmission earlier than previously thought. Evolutionary and spatial analyses revealed clustering in the GH clade, characterized by three amino acid substitutions in spike gene (D614G), RdRp (P323L) and NS3 (Q57H). P323L causes conformational change near nsp8 binding site that might affect virus replication and transcription. In conclusion, assessment of the community transmission among patients with mild COVID-19 illness, particularly those without epidemiological link for acquiring the virus, is of utmost importance to guide policy makers to optimize public health interventions. The detection of SARS-CoV-2 in ILI cases shows the importance of ILI surveillance systems and warrants its further strengthening to mitigate the ongoing transmission of SARS-CoV-2. The effect of NS3 substitutions on oligomerization or membrane channel function (intra- and extracellular) needs functional validation.

Cepheid Xpert® Flu/RSV and Seegene Allplex™ RP1 show high diagnostic agreement for the detection of influenza A/B and respiratory syncytial viruses in clinical practice

Background

Molecular assays based on reverse transcription‐polymerase chain reaction (RT‐PCR) provide reliable results for the detection of respiratory pathogens, although diagnostic agreement varies. This study determined the agreement between the RT‐PCR assays (Xpert^® Flu/RSV vs Allplex^™ RP1) in detecting influenza A, influenza B, and respiratory syncytial viruses (RSVs) in clinical practice.

Methods

We retrospectively identified 914 patient encounters where testing with both Xpert^® Flu/RSV and Allplex^™ RP1 was undertaken between October 2015 and September 2019 in seven hospitals across New South Wales, Australia. The diagnostic agreement of the two assays was evaluated using positive percent agreement, negative percent agreement, and prevalence and bias‐adjusted kappa.

Results

The positive percent agreement was 95.1% for influenza A, 87.5% for influenza B, and 77.8% for RSV. The negative percent agreement was 99.4% for influenza A, 99.9% for influenza B, and 100% for RSV. The prevalence and bias‐adjusted kappa was 0.98 for influenza A, 0.99 for influenza B, and 0.97 for RSV. In a sensitivity analysis, the positive percent agreement values were significantly higher during the non‐influenza season than the influenza season for influenza B and RSV.

Conclusions

The Xpert^® Flu/RSV and Allplex^™ RP1 demonstrated a high diagnostic agreement for all three viruses assessed. The seasonal variation in the positive percent agreement of the two assays for influenza B and RSV may have been due to lower numbers assessed, variability in the virology of infections outside the peak season, or changes in the physiology of the infected host in different seasons.

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.

Evaluation of the Seegene Allplex™ Respiratory Panel for diagnosis of acute respiratory tract infections

Objectives: The Seegene Allplex^TM Respiratory panel was retrospectively challenged using a collection of quality control samples (QCMD) and clinical samples previously analysed with validated routine methods. Methods: A collection of 111 samples [43 QCMD samples, 13 bronchoalveolar lavage fluids and 55 nasopharyngeal aspirates/swabs] was tested with Seegene Allplex^TM. The clinical samples were tested previously using either FTD® Respiratory Pathogens 21 qPCR assay (Fast Track Diagnostics), an in-house multiplex PCR for Bordetella, or BioGX Sample-Ready^TM Atypical pneumo panel (Becton Dickinson). Samples were stored at -80°C prior to analysis with Seegene Allplex™, nucleic acids were automatically extracted with NucliSENS Easymag (bioMérieux). Samples returning discordant results were subjected to repeat testing and/or additional testing by reference laboratories. Results: Seegene correctly identified 41/43 QCMD samples (95.4%); two samples positive for respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) and human metapneumovirus, respectively, were only correctly identified following repeat testing. In the 56 clinical samples, overall, 97 pathogens were identified: 65 pathogens (67.0%) were detected both by routine methods and Seegene, 24 pathogens (24.7%) only by routine methods, and 8 pathogens (8.2%) only by Seegene. The majority of discordant results was detected in samples with low pathogen load (22/32, 68.8%) and in samples containing multiple pathogens (25/32, 78.1%). Full agreement between methods was observed for influenza, RSV, adenovirus, Bordetella (para)pertussis and Chlamydia pneumoniae. Discordance was observed for human metapneumovirus, coronavirus OC43, bocavirus and parainfluenza virus, mainly type 4. Conclusion: Overall, the Seegene Allplex^TM assay performed well for routine detection of important respiratory targets. Acceptable agreement was observed between Seegene and other routine assays.

Multiplex Platforms for the Identification of Respiratory Pathogens: Are They Useful in Pediatric Clinical Practice?

Respiratory tract infections (RTIs) are extremely common especially in the first year of life. Knowledge of the etiology of a RTI is essential to facilitate the appropriate management and the implementation of the most effective control measures. This perspective explains why laboratory methods that can identify pathogens in respiratory secretions have been developed over the course of many years. High-complexity multiplex panel assays that can simultaneously detect up to 20 viruses and up to four bacteria within a few hours have been marketed. However, are these platforms actually useful in pediatric clinical practice? In this manuscript, we showed that these platforms appear to be particularly important for epidemiological studies and clinical research. On the contrary, their routine use in pediatric clinical practice remains debatable. They can be used only in the hospital as they require specific equipment and laboratory technicians with considerable knowledge, training, and experience. Moreover, despite more sensitive and specific than other tests routinely used for respiratory pathogen identification, they do not offer significantly advantage for detection of the true etiology of a respiratory disease. Furthermore, knowledge of which virus is the cause of a respiratory disease is not useful from a therapeutic point of view unless influenza virus or respiratory syncytial virus are the infecting agents as effective drugs are available only for these pathogens. On the other hand, multiplex platforms can be justified in the presence of severe clinical manifestations, and in immunocompromised patients for whom specific treatment option can be available, particularly when they can be used simultaneously with platforms that allow identification of antimicrobial resistance to commonly used drugs. It is highly likely that these platforms, particularly those with high sensitivity and specificity and with low turnaround time, will become essential when new drugs effective and safe against most of the respiratory viruses will be available. Further studies on how to differentiate carriers from patients with true disease, as well as studies on the implications of coinfections and identification of antimicrobial resistance, are warranted.

Clinical Performance of the AllplexTM Respiratory Panel 1 Test Compared to SimplexaTM Flu A/B and RSV for Detection of Influenza Virus and Respiratory Syncytial Virus Infection Including Their Subtyping

OBJECTIVE

TheAllplexTM Respiratory Panel 1 (ARP) is a new assay based on a real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) for the detection of influenza A (Flu A), influenza B virus (Flu B), and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV), including subtyping by multiple detection temperature (MuDT) technology. We evaluated the performance of the Allplex Respiratory Panel compared to the SimplexaTM Flu A/B & RSV assay (SP) and other diagnostic tools.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 372 samples were collected from patients at the Korea University Guro Hospital in Seoul, Korea. All samples were tested for influenza virus and RSV by ARP, SP, and an in-house RT-PCR.

RESULTS

The sensitivity of ARP was 95.56, 100, and 95.24% for Flu A, Flu B, and RSV, respectively. The specificity of ARP was 100, 100, and 100% for Flu A, Flu B, and RSV, respectively. SP had sensitivities and specificities of 98.89 and 100% for Flu A, 100 and 100% for Flu B, and 100 and 100% for RSV.

CONCLUSION

The Allplex panelshowed high sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive, and negative predictive values for the detection of Flu A, Flu B, and RSV. This assay is fast and easy to perform because it takes only about 150 min and there is no need for post-PCR electrophoresis. The ARP can be used as a reliable and convenient assay in clinical laboratories.