Short communicationComparison of a commercial qualitative real-time RT-PCR kit with direct immunofluorescence assay (DFA) and cell culture for detection of influenza A and B in children
Introduction
Influenza types A and B are two of the most important causes of human respiratory infection. The possibility of an impending influenza pandemic increases the need to establish rapid, highly reliable diagnostic testing in laboratories around the world.
Prior to the advent of PCR, DFA and viral isolation were the most sensitive methods for the detection of influenza and other respiratory viruses (Bellau-Pujol et al., 2005, Weinberg et al., 2004). However, a significant number of specimens in patients with clinically compatible viral respiratory infection remain negative by DFA and viral culture, implying a failure to identify the causative virus in a percentage of cases (Ellis et al., 1997, Freymuth et al., 1995, Gilbert et al., 1996). Molecular methods, and in particular, real-time PCR demonstrate greater sensitivity than conventional PCR in detecting microbial agents (Dagher et al., 2004, Templeton et al., 2003).
The artus™ Influenza LC RT-PCR kit is a qualitative assay for both influenza A and B in a real-time format. A study of this kit has not been published. Our study was initiated within the context of the seasonal occurrence of influenza in a pediatric population.
Section snippets
Methods
Nasal swabs were collected from children (birth to 17 years) with suspected respiratory tract infection between January and March 2005 at The Hospital for Sick Children. Of 2070 specimens received, 441 were selected for study, to include about 1/3 positive for influenza A or B, in addition to those positive for other respiratory viruses and those negative for any virus (Table 1). Specimens were collected from the anterior nares using a sterile polyester tipped applicator (Puritan Medical
Results
Of 441 specimens tested, 159 were positive by DFA and/or culture, for influenza A or B (Table 1). 153/159 were positive by artus™ rRT-PCR (96.2% sensitivity). Of the six negative artus™ specimens, five were “DFA-positive/culture-negative” and one was “DFA-negative/culture-positive”. To confirm the PCR results all six RNA were tested with the CDC rRT-PCR assay. The only one of the six specimens confirmed to be positive by the reference PCR was an influenza A DFA-positive/culture-negative/artus™
Discussion
These results indicate the validity of using the artus™ Influenza LC RT-PCR kit for detection of influenza A and B RNA in clinical specimens obtained from a pediatric population. The sensitivity of the artus™ assay was comparable to other studies (Atmar et al., 1996, Steininger et al., 2002).
The chief features of this assay are its high sensitivity and specificity, and its rapidity, which allows all the steps from RNA extraction to amplification/detection to be completed in under 5 h, similar to
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank Dr. Stephen Lindstrom and Dr. Alexander Klimov, CDC, DHHS/CDC/CCID/NCIRD/ID/VSDB, Atlanta, Georgia, USA for authorizing the use of their real-time RT-PCR protocol.
The authors would also like to thank all staff members of the virology laboratory, Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, for their assistance.
We thank Qiagen Inc., for supporting this study by generously donating the artus™ Influenza LC RT-PCR kits.
References (11)
- et al.
Development of three multiplex RT-PCR assays for the detection of 12 respiratory viruses
J Virol Methods
(2005) - et al.
Rhinovirus detection: comparison of real-time and conventional PCR
J Virol Methods
(2004) - et al.
Universal primers for real-time amplification of DNA from all known Orthohepadnavirus species
J Clin Virol
(2003) - et al.
Comparison of reverse transcription-PCR with tissue culture and other rapid diagnostic assays for detection of type A influenza virus
J Clin Microbiol
(1996) - et al.
Multiplex real-time PCR assay for detection of influenza and human respiratory syncytial viruses
J Clin Microbiol
(2004)
Cited by (40)
Molecular microbiology
2018, Principles and Applications of Molecular DiagnosticsInfluenza vaccine effectiveness against medically-attended influenza illness during the 2012-2013 season in Beijing, China
2014, VaccineCitation Excerpt :Our study has several limitations. First, the laboratory confirmation for influenza in this study was based on virus isolation rather than reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) assay, which may have resulted in misclassification of some cases due to the relatively lower sensitivity of virus isolation (around 60%) compared to RT-PCR though virus isolation has excellent specificity [26,27], and thus may have underestimated VE. Second, although we were able to adjust for age, sex, specimen collection interval, and calendar time similar to the adjusted models of other VE networks [20,28], we lacked information on other participant characteristics (e.g., high risk medical conditions) that would have aided in characterizing vaccinated and unvaccinated patients.
Longitudinal analysis of leukocyte differentials in peripheral blood of patients with acute respiratory viral infections
2013, Journal of Clinical VirologyCitation Excerpt :After approximately 24 h in quarantine, we instilled the relevant virus into bilateral nares of subjects using standard methods [15]. We obtained nasal lavage samples from each subject daily for qualitative viral culture and and/or quantitative RT-PCR to assess the success and timing of infection [16]. Peripheral blood samples were drawn daily from all subjects.
Evaluation of multiple commercial molecular and conventional diagnostic assays for the detection of respiratory viruses in children
2011, Clinical Microbiology and InfectionCitation Excerpt :Acute viral respiratory tract infections are a significant cause of morbidity and mortality in children, particularly those with compromised immune systems [1–3]. Nucleic acid amplification tests have shown their superiority over classical diagnostic methods, such as direct fluorescent antibody detection (DFA) and viral isolation, in identifying a broader range of viruses, with higher sensitivity and specificity [4–6]. Recently, several studies have demonstrated the advantages of multiplex PCR for simultaneous detection of a panel of viruses in one assay [7–14].
Non-invasive sample collection for respiratory virus testing by multiplex PCR
2011, Journal of Clinical VirologyCitation Excerpt :In most cases, respiratory samples are collected by invasive methods such as nasopharyngeal swab or nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA) and diagnostics are performed using immunofluorescence and/or culture-based methods.11 Increased sensitivity has been demonstrated with the polymerase chain reaction (PCR),12,13 and the use of PCR diagnostics in hospitals has increased.11 Diagnostic testing for respiratory viruses is also important for surveillance and epidemiologic studies performed in both hospital and community settings.
Diagnosis of influenza from respiratory autopsy tissues: Detection of virus by real-time reverse transcription-PCR in 222 cases
2011, Journal of Molecular Diagnostics