Korologos D and others. 2009. Evaluation of multiple test methods for the detection of the novel 2009 influenza A (H1N1) during the New York City outbreak

Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, North Shore-Long Island Jewish Health System, Lake Success, NY 11042, USA.
Journal of clinical virology: the official publication of the Pan American Society for Clinical Virology (Impact Factor: 3.47). 06/2009; 45(3):191-5. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcv.2009.06.005
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT In response to the novel influenza A H1N1 outbreak in the NY City area, 6090 patient samples were submitted over a 5-week period for a total of 14,114 viral diagnostic tests, including rapid antigen, direct immunofluorescence (DFA), viral culture and PCR. Little was known about the performance of the assays for the detection of novel H1N1 in the background of seasonal H1N1, H3N2 and other circulating respiratory viruses. In addition, subtyping influenza A became critical for the identification of high risk and/or hospitalized patients with novel H1N1 infection and for monitoring the spread of the outbreak.
This study analyzed the performances of the BinaxNOW Influenza A&B test (BinaxNOW), the 3M Rapid Detection Flu A+B test (3MA+B), direct immunofluorescence, R-Mix culture and the Luminex xTAG Respiratory Virus Panel (RVP) for the detection of seasonal influenza, novel H1N1 and other respiratory viruses. RVP was also evaluated for its ability to differentiate seasonal H1N1, H3N2 and novel H1N1.
The sensitivities, specificities, PPVs and NPVs for the detection of novel H1N1, determined by comparing all four-test methods, were: rapid antigen: 17.8%, 93.6%, 77.4%, 47.9%; DFA: 46.7%, 94.5%, 91.3%, 58.9%; R-Mix culture: 88.9%, 100%, 100%, 87.9%; RVP: 97.8%, 100%, 100%, 97.3%. The individual sensitivities of BinaxNOW and 3MA+B as compared to R-Mix culture for the detection of novel H1N1 were 9.6% and 40%, respectively. All unsubtypeable influenza A specimens identified by RVP and tested with the CDC novel H1N1 specific RT-PCR assay were confirmed to be novel H1N1.
Rapid antigen tests, DFA, R-Mix culture and the xTAG RVP test all detected the novel H1N1 strain, but with highly varied sensitivity. The RVP test provided the best diagnostic option as RVP demonstrated superior sensitivity for the detection of all influenza strains, including the novel H1N1, provided accurate influenza A subtyping and identified a significant number of additional respiratory pathogens.

Download full-text


Available from: Christine C Ginocchio, Jan 15, 2014
  • Source
    • "A more specific and reliable option is real time reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR). It provides quantitative read outs, but is time-consuming, expensive, requires trained professionals, and is not feasible for point-of-care application at clinics [6] [7]. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Surface acoustic wave (SAW) sensors using Love wave were designed and fabricated with SiO 2 -coated piezoelectric LiNbO 3 wafers for Influenza A viral antigen detection, in which the targeted analyte was selectively captured at the surface through the antigen and antibody interaction enabled with appropriate surface functionalization. It was found that triethoxysilylbutylaldehyde (ALTES) and triethoxysilylun-decanal ethylene glycol acetal (ACTES) are effective chemical reagents for immobilizing Influenza A hemagglutinin (HA) antibodies on the SiO 2 /LiNbO 3 SAW surface. The detection limit of Influenza A HA H1N1 antigen at an analyte concentration as low as 1 ng mL −1 was demonstrated without any compen-sation design at room temperature with our obtained SAW sensors with the HA antibodies immobilized at ALTES-functionalized surface.
    Sensors and Actuators B Chemical 11/2015; 209:78-84. DOI:10.1016/j.snb.2014.11.103 · 4.29 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "The H1N1 influenza virus, which caused the 2009 pandemic, continues to circulate in some parts of the world, causing variable levels of disease and outbreaks (Rodriguez et al., 2011). Because of rapid result (within 15– 30 min), easy availability, and low cost, the influenza RIDT is used for rapid diagnosis of influenza (Choi et al., 2010; Fuenzalida et al., 2010; Ginocchio et al., 2009; Hurt et al., 2007). The sensitivity of RIDT for detection of influenza A (H1N1) 2009 ranges from 9.6% to 69% (Balish et al., 2009; Fuenzalida et al., 2010). "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The outbreak of pandemic influenza A (H1N1) 2009 virus caused the first influenza pandemic disease of the 21st century. In August 2010, the pandemic moved into the post-pandemic period. However, localized outbreaks of various magnitudes continued with a higher rate of disease severity. The aim of this study was to assess a new polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-oligochromatographic assay (Speed-Oligo) in the diagnosis of novel influenza A (H1N1) 2009. A total of 405 nasopharyngeal aspirate specimens from 400 pediatric and adults patients with suspected infection of pandemic influenza A (H1N1) 2009 were analyzed. The sensitivity and specificity values of the Speed-Oligo assay in comparison to reverse transcriptase-PCR assay developed by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention were 86.5% and 92.2%, respectively. The new assay is simple, rapid, and provides a good sensitivity for detection of influenza A (H1N1) 2009. This assay might be a good alternative to real-time PCR assays for laboratories not equipped with real-time PCR instruments.
    Diagnostic microbiology and infectious disease 12/2011; 72(2):144-9. DOI:10.1016/j.diagmicrobio.2011.10.007 · 2.57 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "The impedance biosensor is based on an immunoassay, and rRT-PCR depends on the use of primers and probes. For the reported rapid immunoassays, such as point-of-case (POC) tests (Drexler et al., 2009; Vasoo et al., 2009; Faix et al., 2009) and the direct fluorescent antibody (DFA) staining (Ginocchio et al., 2009; Ganzenmueller et al., 2010), the sensitivity for influenza A H1N1 detection ranged from 11% to 67%. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Current methods for detection of avian influenza virus (AIV) based on virus culture and RT-PCR are well established, but they are either time consuming or require specialized laboratory facilities and highly trained technicians. A simple, rapid, robust, and reliable test, suitable for use in the field or at the patient's bedside, is urgently needed. In this study, the performance of a newly developed portable impedance biosensor was evaluated by comparison with real-time reverse transcriptase PCR (rRT-PCR) and virus culture for detection of AIV in tracheal and cloacal swab samples collected from experimentally H5N2 AIV infected chickens. The impedance biosensor system was based on a combination of magnetic nanobeads, which were coated with AIV subtype-specific antibody for capture (separation and concentration) of a target virus, and a microfluidic chip with an interdigitated array microelectrode for transfer and detection of target virus, and impedance measurement of the bio-nanobeads and AI virus complexes in a buffer solution. A comparison of results obtained from 59 swab samples using virus culture, impedance biosensor and rRT-PCR methods showed that the impedance biosensor technique was comparable in sensitivity and specificity to rRT-PCR. Detection time for the impedance biosensor is less than 1h.
    Journal of virological methods 08/2011; 178(1-2):52-8. DOI:10.1016/j.jviromet.2011.08.011 · 1.88 Impact Factor
Show more