Comparison of the Biofire FilmArray Respiratory Panel, Seegene AnyplexII RV16, and Argene for the detection of respiratory viruses

Performance comparison of three commercial multiplex molecular panels for respiratory viruses at a South African academic hospital

Background

Respiratory infections are a major contributor to hospital admissions. Identification of respiratory pathogens by means of conventional culture and serology methods remains challenging. Multiplex molecular assays are an appealing alternative that endeavours to be rapid, more accurate and less arduous.

Objective

The study aimed to compare the clinical performance of three commercial multiplex molecular assays for respiratory viruses.

Methods

Forty-eight respiratory specimens obtained from patients at Tygerberg Hospital in the Western Cape province of South Africa were studied. These specimens were collected between May 2020 and August 2020. The results of the Seegene Anyplex™ II RV16, FilmArray® Respiratory 2.1 plus Panel (FARP), and QIAstat-Dx® Respiratory SARS-CoV-2 Panel (QRP) were analysed based on the overlapping targets. A composite reference standard was applied to provide a standard reference for comparison.

Results

The overall sensitivity of the Seegene Anyplex™ II RV16 was 96.6% (57/59), the FARP 98.2% (56/57) and the QRP 80.7% (46/57). The overall specificities were 99.8% (660/661), 99.0% (704/711) and 99.7% (709/711), respectively. The QRP failed to detect coronaviruses and parainfluenza viruses in 41.7% (5/12) and 28.6% (4/14) of positive specimens, respectively, while the FARP produced the lowest target specificity of 88.4% (38/43) for rhinovirus/enterovirus.

Conclusion

The overall specificity of all three platforms was comparable; however, the sensitivity of the QRP was inferior to that of the ARV and FARP.

What this study adds

This study adds to the body of performance characteristics described for respiratory multiplex panels, especially in the African context where molecular diagnostics for infectious diseases are gaining momentum.

Combined multiplex panel test results are a poor estimate of disease prevalence without adjustment for test error

Multiplex panel tests identify many individual pathogens at once, using a set of component tests. In some panels the number of components can be large. If the panel is detecting causative pathogens for a single syndrome or disease then we might estimate the burden of that disease by combining the results of the panel, for example determining the prevalence of pneumococcal pneumonia as caused by many individual pneumococcal serotypes. When we are dealing with multiplex test panels with many components, test error in the individual components of a panel, even when present at very low levels, can cause significant overall error. Uncertainty in the sensitivity and specificity of the individual tests, and statistical fluctuations in the numbers of false positives and false negatives, will cause large uncertainty in the combined estimates of disease prevalence. In many cases this can be a source of significant bias. In this paper we develop a mathematical framework to characterise this issue, we determine expressions for the sensitivity and specificity of panel tests. In this we identify a counter-intuitive relationship between panel test sensitivity and disease prevalence that means panel tests become more sensitive as prevalence increases. We present novel statistical methods that adjust for bias and quantify uncertainty in prevalence estimates from panel tests, and use simulations to test these methods. As multiplex testing becomes more commonly used for screening in routine clinical practice, accumulation of test error due to the combination of large numbers of test results needs to be identified and corrected for.

Epidemiological Characterization of Respiratory Pathogens Using the Multiplex PCR FilmArray™ Respiratory Panel

Various pathogens can cause upper respiratory tract infections, presenting challenges in accurate diagnosis due to similar symptomatology. Therefore, rapid and precise diagnostic tests are crucial for effective treatment planning. Traditional culture-based methods for diagnosis are limited by their reliance on skilled personnel and lengthy processing times. In contrast, multiplex polymerase chain reaction (PCR) techniques offer enhanced accuracy and speed in identifying respiratory pathogens. In this study, we aimed to assess the efficacy of the FilmArray™ Respiratory Panel (RP), a multiplex PCR test capable of simultaneously screening 20 pathogens. This retrospective analysis was conducted at Dankook University Hospital, South Korea, between January 2018 and December 2022. Samples from patients with upper respiratory tract infections were analyzed. Results revealed adenovirus as the most prevalent pathogen (18.9%), followed by influenza virus A (16.5%), among others. Notably, a 22.5% co-infection rate was observed. The FilmArray™ RP method successfully identified 20 pathogens within 2 h, facilitating prompt treatment decisions and mitigating unnecessary antibiotic prescriptions. This study underscores the utility of multiplex PCR in respiratory pathogen identification, offering valuable insights for epidemiological surveillance and diagnosis.

Trends in Molecular Diagnosis of Nosocomial Pneumonia Classic PCR vs. Point-of-Care PCR: A Narrative Review

Nosocomial pneumonia is one of the most frequent hospital-acquired infections. One of the types of nosocomial pneumonia is ventilator-associated pneumonia, which occurs in endotracheally intubated patients in intensive care units (ICU). Ventilator-associated pneumonia may be caused by multidrug-resistant pathogens, which increase the risk of complications due to the difficulty in treating them. Pneumonia is a respiratory disease that requires targeted antimicrobial treatment initiated as early as possible to have a good outcome. For the therapy to be as specific and started sooner, diagnostic methods have evolved rapidly, becoming quicker and simpler to perform. Polymerase chain reaction (PCR) is a rapid diagnostic technique with numerous advantages compared to classic plate culture-based techniques. Researchers continue to improve diagnostic methods; thus, the newest types of PCR can be performed at the bedside, in the ICU, so-called point of care testing-PCR (POC-PCR). The purpose of this review is to highlight the benefits and drawbacks of PCR-based techniques in managing nosocomial pneumonia.

Clinical yield of multiple testing with respiratory pathogen panels

Though multiplex respiratory pathogen panels (RPP) have high sensitivity, multiple tests are occasionally performed simultaneously or in rapid succession in an attempt to increase the yield. The purpose of this study was to assess the impact of this practice.

METHODS

"Multiple testing" was defined as >1 RPP performed within 12 hours on the same patient and specimen type. All cases of multiple testing for adults at two hospitals over a 5-year period were included. Chart review was performed to determine whether discordant results led to a clinical diagnosis or change in clinical management.

RESULTS

Of 18,779 RPPs, 462 (2.5%) represented cases of multiple testing. Twenty-six of 462 cases (5.6%) produced discordant results. Five discordant results (1.1% of 462 multiple testing episodes) were associated with a clinical diagnosis, and 4 (0.9%) influenced clinical management.

CONCLUSION

Multiple RPP testing facilitates clinical management in <1% of cases. Medical centers may consider de-implementing this practice.

New methods in meningitis diagnosis

Meningitis remains a worldwide problem and Central nervous system (CNS) infections are associated with devastating sequelae, including cognitive deficits, vision and hearing impairment, motor and sensory deficits and epilepsy in over one-half of survivors. Rapid diagnosis of meningitis is essential to improve chances at survival and minimize unnecessary healthcare costs related to isolation procedures and empiric treatment. Multiplex molecular assays are an attractive option for the simultaneous detection of several microbial targets. Currently, several assays are marketed. The aim of our review is to comprehensively evaluate the molecular available systems of using a new multiplex PCR panel in determining the microbiologic etiologies of meningitis.

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.

Evaluation of Molecular Point-of-Care Testing for Respiratory Pathogens in Children With Respiratory Infections: A Retrospective Case-Control Study

Objectives

Overuse of antibiotics and antibiotic resistance are global healthcare problems. In pediatric patients with respiratory infections, viral and bacterial etiologies are challenging to distinguish, leading to irrational antibiotic use. Rapid and accurate molecular diagnostic testing methods for respiratory pathogens has been shown to facilitate effective clinical decision-making and guide antibiotic stewardship interventions in the developed regions, but its impacts on pediatric patient care in the developing countries remain unclear.

Methods

In this single-center, retrospective case-control study, we compared demographics, clinical characteristics, especially microbiological findings, and antibiotic usage between pediatric patients with respiratory infection receiving FilmArray Respiratory Panel (FilmArray RP) testing and a matched routine testing control group. Our primary outcome was the duration of intravenous antibiotics treatment (DOT) during hospitalization.

Results

Each group consisted of 346 children with a respiratory infection. In the FilmArray RP testing group, the DOT was shorter than that in the routine testing group (6.41 ± 3.67 days versus 7.23 ± 4.27 days; p = 0.006). More patients in the FilmArray RP testing group de-escalated antibiotic treatments within 72 hours of hospitalization (7.80%, 27/346 versus 2.60%, 9/346; p = 0.002). By contrast, fewer patients in the FilmArray RP testing group had escalated antibiotic treatments between 72 hours and seven days (7.80% versus 14.16%; p = 0.007). The cost of hospitalization was significantly lower in the FilmArray RP testing group ($ 1413.51 ± 1438.01 versus $ 1759.37 ± 1929.22; p = 0.008). Notably, the subgroup analyses revealed that the FilmArray RP test could shorten the DOT, improve early de-escalation of intravenous antibiotics within 72 hours of hospitalization, decline the escalation of intravenous antibiotics between 72 hours and seven days, and reduce the cost of hospitalization for both patient populations with or without underlying diseases.

Conclusions

Molecular point-of-care testing for respiratory pathogens could help to reduce intravenous antibiotic use and health care costs of pediatric patients with respiratory infections in developing countries.

Respiratory viral infections in pragmatically selected adults in intensive care units

Respiratory viruses can be detected in 18.3 to 48.9% of critically ill adults with severe respiratory tract infections (RTIs). The present study aims to assess the clinical significance of respiratory viruses in pragmatically selected adults in medical intensive care unit patients and to identify factors associated with viral respiratory viral tract infections (VRTIs). We conducted a prospective study on critically ill adults with suspected RTIs without recognized respiratory pathogens. Viral cultures with monoclonal antibody identification, in-house real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR) for influenza virus, and FilmArray respiratory panel were used to detect viral pathogens. Multivariable logistic regression was applied to identify factors associated with VRTIs. Sixty-four (40.5%) of the included 158 critically ill adults had respiratory viruses detected in their respiratory specimens. The commonly detected viruses included influenza virus (20), followed by human rhinovirus/enterovirus (11), respiratory syncitial virus (9), human metapneumovirus (9), human parainfluenza viruses (8), human adenovirus (7), and human coronaviruses (2). The FilmArray respiratory panel detected respiratory viruses in 54 (34.6%) patients, but showed negative results for seven of 13 patients with influenza A/H3 infection. In the multivariable logistic regression model, patient characters associated with VRTIs included those aged < 65 years, household contact with individuals with upper RTI, the presence of fever, cough with sputum production, and sore throat. Respiratory viruses were not uncommonly detected in the pragmatically selected adults with critical illness. The application of multiplex PCR testing for respiratory viruses in selected patient population is a practical strategy, and the viral detection rate could be further improved by the patient characters recognized in this study.

[Coinfections of influenza and other respiratory viruses are associated to children]

INTRODUCTION

Coinfections of influenza and other respiratory viruses (ORVs) are frequent in the epidemic season. The aim of this study was to examine the demographic and virological variables associated with coinfections by influenza and ORVs.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We analysed respiratory samples of patients with laboratory-confirmed influenza using molecular diagnostic methods obtained in 8 consecutive influenza seasons (2011-2012 to 2018-2019). We analysed data focusing on different variables: age, sex, type of patient (hospitalized/sentinel) and detected type/subtype of influenza.

RESULTS

Coinfections of influenza and ORVs were detected in 17.8% of influenza-positive samples. The probability of detecting coinfection was significantly higher in young children (0-4 years; OR: 2.7; 95% CI: 2.2-3.4), children (5-14 years; OR: 1.6; 95% CI: 1.2-2.1) and patients infected with the A(H3N2) subtype (OR: 1.4; 95% CI: 1.14-1.79). Also, we found a significantly higher frequency of coinfections involving influenza and 2 or more other respiratory viruses in young children (0-4 years; OR: 0.5; 95% CI: 0.32-0.8), adults (40-64 years; OR: 0.5; 95% CI: 0.3-0.9) and women (OR: 0.7; 95% CI: 0.5-0.9).

DISCUSSION

These results show that coinfections of influenza and ORVs are more frequent in young children and children, and in cases involving the A(H3N2) influenza subtype. Our findings can be useful to guide the use of multiplex diagnostic methods in laboratories with limited resources.

Considerations for diagnostic COVID-19 tests

During the early phase of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, design, development, validation, verification and implementation of diagnostic tests were actively addressed by a large number of diagnostic test manufacturers. Hundreds of molecular tests and immunoassays were rapidly developed, albeit many still await clinical validation and formal approval. In this Review, we summarize the crucial role of diagnostic tests during the first global wave of COVID-19. We explore the technical and implementation problems encountered during this early phase in the pandemic, and try to define future directions for the progressive and better use of (syndromic) diagnostics during a possible resurgence of COVID-19 in future global waves or regional outbreaks. Continuous global improvement in diagnostic test preparedness is essential for more rapid detection of patients, possibly at the point of care, and for optimized prevention and treatment, in both industrialized countries and low-resource settings.

Performance of BioFire array or QuickVue influenza A + B test versus a validation qPCR assay for detection of influenza A during a volunteer A/California/2009/H1N1 challenge study

Background

Influenza places a significant burden on global health and economics. Individual case management and public health efforts to mitigate the spread of influenza are both strongly impacted by our ability to accurately and efficiently detect influenza viruses in clinical samples. Therefore, it is important to understand the performance characteristics of available assays to detect influenza in a variety of settings. We provide the first report of relative performance between two products marketed to streamline detection of influenza virus in the context of a highly controlled volunteer influenza challenge study.

Methods

Nasopharyngeal swab samples were collected during a controlled A/California/2009/H1N1 influenza challenge study and analyzed for detection of virus shedding using a validated qRT-PCR (qPCR) assay, a sample-to-answer qRT-PCR device (BioMerieux BioFire FilmArray RP), and an immunoassay based rapid test kit (Quidel QuickVue Influenza A + B Test).

Results

Relative to qPCR, the sensitivity and specificity of the BioFire assay was 72.1% [63.7–79.5%, 95% confidence interval (CI)] and 93.5% (89.3–96.4%, 95% CI) respectively. For the QuickVue rapid test the sensitivity was 8.5% (4.8–13.7%, 95% CI) and specificity was 99.2% (95.6–100%, 95% CI).

Conclusion

Relative to qPCR, the BioFire assay had superior performance compared to rapid test in the context of a controlled influenza challenge study.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12985-021-01516-0.

Identification of pathogens from the upper respiratory tract of adult emergency department patients at high risk for influenza complications in a pre-Sars-CoV-2 environment

The emergence of SARS-CoV-2 and subsequent COVID-19 pandemic highlights the morbidity and potential disease severity caused by respiratory viruses. To elucidate pathogen prevalence, etiology of coinfections and URIs from symptomatic adult Emergency department patients in a pre-SARS-CoV-2 environment, we evaluated specimens from four geographically diverse Emergency departments in the United States from 2013-2014 utilizing ePlex RP RUO cartridges (Genmark Diagnostics). The overall positivity was 30.1% (241/799), with 6.6% (16/241) coinfections. Noninfluenza pathogens from most to least common were rhinovirus/enterovirus, coronavirus, human metapneumovirus and RSV, respectively. Broad differences in disease prevalence and pathogen distributions were observed across geographic regions; the site with the highest detection rate (for both mono and coinfections) demonstrated the greatest pathogen diversity. A variety of respiratory pathogens and geographic variations in disease prevalence and copathogen type were observed. Further research is required to evaluate the clinical relevance of these findings, especially considering the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic and related questions regarding SARS-CoV-2 disease severity and the presence of co-infections.

[Virological diagnosis of lower respiratory tract infections]

INTRODUCTION

The etiological diagnosis of bronchopulmonary infections cannot be assessed with clinical, radiological and epidemiological data alone. Viruses have been demonstrated to cause a large proportion of these infections, both in children and adults.

BACKGROUND

The diagnosis of viral bronchopulmonary infections is based on the analysis of secretions, collected from the lower respiratory tract when possible, by techniques that detect either influenza and respiratory syncytial viruses, or a large panel of viruses that can be responsible for respiratory disease. The latter, called multiplex PCR assays, allow a syndromic approach to respiratory infection. Their high cost for the laboratory raises the question of their place in the management of patients in terms of antibiotic economy and isolation. In the absence of clear recommendations, the strategy and equipment are very unevenly distributed in France.

OUTLOOK

Medico-economic analyses need to be performed in France to evaluate the place of these tests in the management of patients. The evaluation of the role of the different viruses often detected in co-infection, especially in children, also deserves the attention of virologists and clinicians.

CONCLUSIONS

The availability of new diagnostic technologies, the recent emergence of SARS-CoV-2, together with the availability of new antiviral drugs are likely to impact future recommendations for the management of viral bronchopulmonary infections.

Role of Respiratory Syncytial Virus in Pediatric Pneumonia

Respiratory viral infections represent the leading cause of hospitalization in infants and young children worldwide and the second leading cause of infant mortality. Among these, Respiratory Syncytial Virus (RSV) represents the main cause of lower respiratory tract infections (LRTIs) in young children worldwide. RSV manifestation can range widely from mild upper respiratory infections to severe respiratory infections, mainly bronchiolitis and pneumonia, leading to hospitalization, serious complications (such as respiratory failure), and relevant sequalae in childhood and adulthood (wheezing, asthma, and hyperreactive airways). There are no specific clinical signs or symptoms that can distinguish RSV infection from other respiratory pathogens. New multiplex platforms offer the possibility to simultaneously identify different pathogens, including RSV, with an accuracy similar to that of single polymerase chain reaction (PCR) in the majority of cases. At present, the treatment of RSV infection relies on supportive therapy, mainly consisting of oxygen and hydration. Palivizumab is the only prophylactic method available for RSV infection. Advances in technology and scientific knowledge have led to the creation of different kinds of vaccines and drugs to treat RSV infection. Despite the good level of these studies, there are currently few registered strategies to prevent or treat RSV due to difficulties related to the unpredictable nature of the disease and to the specific target population.

Rapid detection of respiratory organisms with FilmArray respiratory panel and its impact on clinical decisions in Shanghai, China, 2016-2018

BACKGROUND

In this study, we evaluated the diagnostic potential and clinical impact of an automated multiplex PCR platform (the FilmArray Respiratory Panel; FA-RP), specially designed for pathogen detection in respiratory tract infections in adults with unexplained pneumonia (UP).

METHODS

A total of 112 UP patients in Shanghai, China, were enrolled prospectively and assessed using the FA-RP from October 2016 to March 2018. We examined the test results and their influence on clinical decisions. Furthermore, as a control group, we retrospectively obtained the clinical data of 70 UP patients between October 2014 and March 2016 (before the FA-RP was available). The two patient groups were compared with respect to factors, including general antimicrobial use and defined daily dose (DDD) numbers.

RESULTS

Between October 2016 and March 2018, the positive rate obtained using FA-RP for UP was 76.8%. The primary pathogens in adults with UP were Influenza A/B (47.3%, 53/112). Compared with the patients before FA-RP was available, patients who underwent FA-RP testing had higher rates of antiviral drug use and antibiotic de-escalation during clinical treatment. FA-RP significantly decreased the total DDDs of antibiotic or antifungal drugs DDDs by 7 days after admission (10.6 ± 2.5 vs 14.1 ± 8.8, P < .01).

CONCLUSIONS

The FA-RP is a rapid and sensitive nucleic acid amplification test method for UP diagnosis in adults. The application of FA-RP may lead to a more accurately targeted antimicrobial treatment and reduced use of antibiotic/antifungal drugs.

Evaluation of a molecular point-of-care testing for viral and atypical pathogens on intravenous antibiotic duration in hospitalized adults with lower respiratory tract infection: a randomized clinical trial

Objectives

The primary objective was to evaluate whether a molecular point-of-care test (POCT) for viral and atypical pathogens added to routine real-time PCR could reduce duration of intravenous antibiotics in hospitalized patients with lower respiratory tract infection (LRTI) compared with routine real-time PCR.

Methods

In this single-centre, open-label, randomized controlled study, we enrolled hospitalized adults diagnosed with LRTI. Patients were randomized to an intervention group (POCT FilmArray Panel for 20 viruses, atypical pathogens and bacteria plus routine real-time PCR) or a control group (routine real-time PCR for ten pathogens). The primary outcome was duration of intravenous antibiotics during hospitalization. The secondary outcomes included length of stay, cost of hospitalization and de-escalation within 72 hours and between 72 hours and 7 days. Intention-to-treat analysis was used.

Results

Between October 2017 and July 2018, we enrolled 800 eligible patients (398 in the intervention group and 402 in the control group). Duration of intravenous antibiotics in the intervention group was shorter than in the control (7.0 days (interquartile range (IQR) 5.0–9.0) versus 8.0 days (IQR 6.0–11.0); p <0.001). Length of hospital stay in the intervention group was significantly shorter (8.0 days (IQR 7.0–11.0) versus 9.0 days (IQR 7.0–12.0; p <0.001) and the cost of hospitalization in the intervention group was significantly lower ($1804.7 (IQR 1298.4–2633.8) versus $2042.5 (IQR 1427.4–2926.2); p 0.002) than control group. More patients in the intervention group achieved de-escalation within 72 hours (7.9%, 29/367 versus 3.2%, 12/377; p 0.005) and between 72 hours and 7 days (29.7%, 109/367 versus 22.0%, 83/377; p 0.024).

Conclusions

Use of molecular POCT testing for respiratory viruses and atypical pathogens might help to reduce intravenous antibiotic use in hospitalized LRTI patients.

Clinical Trial Registration

clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT03391076.

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.