• FluTrackers.com Inc. does not provide medical advice. Information on this web site is collected from various internet resources, and the FluTrackers board of directors makes no warranty to the safety, efficacy, correctness or completeness of the information posted on this site by any author or poster. The information collated here is for instructional and/or discussion purposes only and is NOT intended to diagnose or treat any disease, illness, or other medical condition. Every individual reader or poster should seek advice from their personal physician/healthcare practitioner before considering or using any interventions that are discussed on this website. By continuing to access this website you agree to consult your personal physican before using any interventions posted on this website, and you agree to hold harmless FluTrackers.com Inc., the board of directors, the members, and all authors and posters for any effects from use of any medication, supplement, vitamin or other substance, device, intervention, etc. mentioned in posts on this website, or other internet venues referenced in posts on this website.
  • We are not asking for any donations. Do not donate to any entity who says they are raising funds for us.

Pathogens . Clinical Evaluation of Three Commercial RT-PCR Kits for Routine COVID-19 Diagnosis

tetano

Editor, Senior Moderator
Pathogens


. 2022 Nov 21;11(11):1389.
doi: 10.3390/pathogens11111389.
Clinical Evaluation of Three Commercial RT-PCR Kits for Routine COVID-19 Diagnosis


Rifat Tasnim Juthi[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Saiful Arefeen Sazed[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Md Fahad Zamil[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Mohammad Shafiul Alam[SUP] 1 [/SUP]



Affiliations

Abstract

Amongst the multiple ways to diagnose coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19), reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) remains the reference gold standard, providing fast and accurate results. This study evaluated and compared the performance of three commercially available COVID-19 RT-PCR kits-Aridia[SUP]®[/SUP] COVID-19 Real-Time PCR Test (CTK Biotech, Inc., Poway, CA, USA), Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) Nucleic Acid Detection Kit (Sansure Biotech Inc., Changsha, China) and Allplex[SUP]TM[/SUP] 2019-nCoV assay (Seegene Inc., Seoul, Republic of Korea) for the detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). A total of 326 clinically suspected patients were enrolled for the study, and among them, 209 were diagnosed as positive and 117 as negative when tested with the reference method, US CDC 2019-Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) Real Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel. The Aridia[SUP]®[/SUP] kit showed total agreement with the reference test, with a sensitivity of 100% (95% CI: 98.25% to 100.0%) and a specificity of 100% (96.90% to 100.00%). The Allplex[SUP]TM[/SUP] kit also showed 100% specificity (95% CI: 96.90% to 100.00%), but a lower sensitivity (98.09%, 95% CI: 95.17% to 99.48%). Among the three kits, the Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) Nucleic Acid Detection Kit showed the worst performance, with a sensitivity of 98.6% (95% CI: 95.9% to 99.7%) and a specificity of 95.73, 95% (CI: 90.31% to 98.60%). While all these kits conform to the requirement for routine molecular diagnosis with high performances, the Aridia[SUP]®[/SUP] COVID-19 Real-Time PCR Test showed the best performance among the three kits.

Keywords: COVID-19; RT-PCR; RT-PCR kit; SARS-CoV-2; diagnostics; real time PCR; real time RT-PCR.
 
Back
Top Bottom