Prospective, multi-site evaluation of the Cepheid Xpert Xpress CoV-2 plus test on nasal and nasopharyngeal swabs.

IF 6.1 2区 医学 Q1 MICROBIOLOGY
Alexander L Greninger, Allan Larcena, Amrish Patel, Brian Webster, Christina Ulen, Dallas F Green, Dana King, Deepesh Rubin Patel, Erin McElvania, Glenn Harnett, Imad Jandali, Jane Gibson, Jennifer Killion, Jibran Atwi, Kelly Bergmann, Lance Slade, Mary Allen Staat, Matthew Faron, Megan Washington, Rahul Patel, Rajasekaran Annamalai, Ronald Ackerman, William P Stewart, Yuliet Mora Amador, Deepa Rao, Xiaohong Liu, Aarthi Raman
{"title":"Prospective, multi-site evaluation of the Cepheid Xpert Xpress CoV-2 <i>plus</i> test on nasal and nasopharyngeal swabs.","authors":"Alexander L Greninger, Allan Larcena, Amrish Patel, Brian Webster, Christina Ulen, Dallas F Green, Dana King, Deepesh Rubin Patel, Erin McElvania, Glenn Harnett, Imad Jandali, Jane Gibson, Jennifer Killion, Jibran Atwi, Kelly Bergmann, Lance Slade, Mary Allen Staat, Matthew Faron, Megan Washington, Rahul Patel, Rajasekaran Annamalai, Ronald Ackerman, William P Stewart, Yuliet Mora Amador, Deepa Rao, Xiaohong Liu, Aarthi Raman","doi":"10.1128/jcm.01219-24","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) continues its largely aseasonal spread with millions of cases per year. Highly sensitive, point-of-care testing is critical for rapid detection of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) cases and initiation of antiviral therapy to avert adverse health outcomes and reduce onward transmission of the virus. While hundreds of COVID-19 diagnostics received emergency use authorization from the FDA during the pandemic, significantly fewer have navigated the course to FDA clearance or approval. Here, we determined the clinical performance of the Cepheid Xpert Xpress CoV-2 <i>plus</i> for detection of SARS-CoV-2 in 3,750 anterior nasal swab (NS) specimens and nasopharyngeal swab (NPS) from 32 sites in comparison to the FDA-authorized BioFire Respiratory Panel 2.1. Three-quarters of specimens collected were tested on the Xpert Xpress CoV-2 <i>plus</i> in the point-of-care setting. Overall positive percent agreement (PPA) was 98.1% (95% CI: 96.7%-98.9%) and negative percent agreement (NPA) was 98.3% (97.7%-98.7%). Performance of the Xpert Xpress CoV-2 <i>plus</i> was slightly improved in NS compared to NPS specimens, with PPA of 99.3% versus 97.0% (Fisher's exact test, <i>P</i> = 0.06) and NPA of 98.3% versus 98.2% (<i>P</i> = 0.89), respectively. Assay PPA was similar between untrained and trained users (98.7% vs 97.3%, <i>P</i> = 0.75), while NPA was slightly improved for untrained users (99.0% vs 97.6%, <i>P</i> = 0.0003). This study showed that Cepheid Xpert Xpress COV-2 <i>plus</i> is highly sensitive and specific/has high PPA and NPA for detection of SARS-CoV-2 from both NS and NPS specimens.</p><p><strong>Importance: </strong>Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) continues to cause millions of infections and tens of thousands of deaths per year in the United States. While the FDA authorized hundreds of SARS-CoV-2 tests during the public health emergency, significantly fewer have made the transition to being cleared or approved. There continues to be a need for FDA-authorized point-of-care SARS-CoV-2 testing that can be performed by untrained users. We conducted a large prospective study of the Cepheid Xpert Xpress CoV-2 <i>plus</i> test for detection of SARS-CoV-2 in both nasal and nasopharyngeal swabs by trained and untrained users. The assay demonstrated excellent clinical performance characteristics and, as a result of this study, was cleared by the FDA.</p>","PeriodicalId":15511,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Microbiology","volume":" ","pages":"e0121924"},"PeriodicalIF":6.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical Microbiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1128/jcm.01219-24","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MICROBIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) continues its largely aseasonal spread with millions of cases per year. Highly sensitive, point-of-care testing is critical for rapid detection of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) cases and initiation of antiviral therapy to avert adverse health outcomes and reduce onward transmission of the virus. While hundreds of COVID-19 diagnostics received emergency use authorization from the FDA during the pandemic, significantly fewer have navigated the course to FDA clearance or approval. Here, we determined the clinical performance of the Cepheid Xpert Xpress CoV-2 plus for detection of SARS-CoV-2 in 3,750 anterior nasal swab (NS) specimens and nasopharyngeal swab (NPS) from 32 sites in comparison to the FDA-authorized BioFire Respiratory Panel 2.1. Three-quarters of specimens collected were tested on the Xpert Xpress CoV-2 plus in the point-of-care setting. Overall positive percent agreement (PPA) was 98.1% (95% CI: 96.7%-98.9%) and negative percent agreement (NPA) was 98.3% (97.7%-98.7%). Performance of the Xpert Xpress CoV-2 plus was slightly improved in NS compared to NPS specimens, with PPA of 99.3% versus 97.0% (Fisher's exact test, P = 0.06) and NPA of 98.3% versus 98.2% (P = 0.89), respectively. Assay PPA was similar between untrained and trained users (98.7% vs 97.3%, P = 0.75), while NPA was slightly improved for untrained users (99.0% vs 97.6%, P = 0.0003). This study showed that Cepheid Xpert Xpress COV-2 plus is highly sensitive and specific/has high PPA and NPA for detection of SARS-CoV-2 from both NS and NPS specimens.

Importance: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) continues to cause millions of infections and tens of thousands of deaths per year in the United States. While the FDA authorized hundreds of SARS-CoV-2 tests during the public health emergency, significantly fewer have made the transition to being cleared or approved. There continues to be a need for FDA-authorized point-of-care SARS-CoV-2 testing that can be performed by untrained users. We conducted a large prospective study of the Cepheid Xpert Xpress CoV-2 plus test for detection of SARS-CoV-2 in both nasal and nasopharyngeal swabs by trained and untrained users. The assay demonstrated excellent clinical performance characteristics and, as a result of this study, was cleared by the FDA.

对鼻腔和鼻咽拭子上的 Cepheid Xpert Xpress CoV-2 plus 检测进行前瞻性多站点评估。
严重急性呼吸系统综合征冠状病毒 2(SARS-CoV-2)继续在很大程度上呈季节性传播,每年有数百万病例。高灵敏度的床旁检测对于快速检测 2019 年冠状病毒病(COVID-19)病例和启动抗病毒治疗以避免不良健康后果和减少病毒继续传播至关重要。在大流行期间,有数百种 COVID-19 诊断试剂获得了美国食品药品管理局的紧急使用授权,但能够通过美国食品药品管理局审批的试剂则少得多。在这里,我们测定了 Cepheid Xpert Xpress CoV-2 plus 的临床性能,与 FDA 授权的 BioFire Respiratory Panel 2.1 相比,Cepheid Xpert Xpress CoV-2 plus 可检测来自 32 个地点的 3,750 份前鼻拭子 (NS) 标本和鼻咽拭子 (NPS) 中的 SARS-CoV-2 病毒。收集到的标本中有四分之三是在医疗点用 Xpert Xpress CoV-2 plus 检测的。总体阳性一致率 (PPA) 为 98.1%(95% CI:96.7%-98.9%),阴性一致率 (NPA) 为 98.3%(97.7%-98.7%)。与 NPS 标本相比,Xpert Xpress CoV-2 plus 在 NS 标本中的性能略有提高,PPA 分别为 99.3% 对 97.0%(费雪精确检验,P = 0.06),NPA 分别为 98.3% 对 98.2%(P = 0.89)。未经培训和经过培训的用户之间的化验 PPA 相似(98.7% 对 97.3%,P = 0.75),而未经培训的用户的 NPA 略有提高(99.0% 对 97.6%,P = 0.0003)。这项研究表明,Cepheid Xpert Xpress COV-2 plus 在检测 NS 和 NPS 标本中的 SARS-CoV-2 时具有高灵敏度和特异性/高 PPA 和 NPA:严重急性呼吸系统综合征冠状病毒 2(SARS-CoV-2)在美国每年仍会造成数百万人感染和数万人死亡。虽然美国食品及药物管理局在公共卫生紧急状态期间批准了数百项 SARS-CoV-2 检测项目,但通过审核或获得批准的项目却少得多。美国食品及药物管理局仍需要获得授权的、可由未经培训的用户进行的 SARS-CoV-2 护理点检测。我们对 Cepheid Xpert Xpress CoV-2 plus 检测试剂盒进行了一项大型前瞻性研究,以便由受过培训和未受过培训的用户检测鼻腔和鼻咽拭子中的 SARS-CoV-2 。该检测方法显示出卓越的临床性能特征,并因此获得了美国食品及药物管理局的批准。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Clinical Microbiology
Journal of Clinical Microbiology 医学-微生物学
CiteScore
17.10
自引率
4.30%
发文量
347
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: The Journal of Clinical Microbiology® disseminates the latest research concerning the laboratory diagnosis of human and animal infections, along with the laboratory's role in epidemiology and the management of infectious diseases.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信