Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20826644›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology2010

Real-time detection of influenza a, influenza B, and respiratory syncytial virus a and B in respiratory specimens by use of nanoparticle probes.

Paul J Jannetto, Blake W Buchan, Kimberly A Vaughan, Joellen S Ledford, Dennis K Anderson, Donald C Henley, Neil B Quigley, Nathan A Ledeboer

Abstract readComparative StudyEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical microbiology, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Comparison of three commercial RT-PCR systems for the detection of respiratory viruses.Journal of clinical virology : the official publication of the Pan American Society for Clinical Virology · 2014
    Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. What is the role of newer molecular tests in the management of CAP?Infectious disease clinics of North America · 2013
    Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Paul J JannettoDepartment of Pathology, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53226, USA.
Blake W Buchan
Kimberly A Vaughan
Joellen S Ledford
Dennis K Anderson
Donald C Henley
Neil B Quigley
Nathan A Ledeboer

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Seasonal epidemics of influenza and respiratory syncytial virus are responsible for significant morbidity and mortality worldwide. Infrequently, novel or reemergent strains of influenza A virus have caused rapid, severe global pandemics resulting in millions of fatalities. The ability to efficiently and accurately detect and differentiate respiratory viruses is paramount for effective treatment, infection control, and epidemiological surveillance. We evaluated the ability of two FDA-cleared nucleic acid-based tests, the semiautomated respiratory virus nucleic acid test (VRNAT) and the fully automated respiratory virus nucleic acid test SP (RVNAT(SP)) (Nanosphere Inc., Northbrook, IL) to detect influenza A virus, influenza B virus, and respiratory syncytial virus A and B (RSV A/B) from clinical nasopharyngeal swab specimens. Detection of viral RNA in both tests is based on nucleic acid amplification followed by hybridization to capture probes immobilized on a glass slide. A novel technology utilizing gold nanoparticle-conjugated probes is utilized to detect the presence of captured target DNA. This microarray-based approach to detection has proven to be more sensitive than the traditional culture/direct fluorescent-antibody assay (DFA) method for detecting RSV and influenza viruses in clinical specimens, including the novel 2009 H1N1 strain. Specifically, we report 98.0% sensitivity and 96.5% specificity for the VRNAT compared to culture/DFA. Further, the VRNAT detected virus in an additional 58% of specimens that were culture negative. These data were confirmed using bidirectional sequencing. Evaluation of the fully automated RVNAT(SP), which is built on the same detection technology as the VRNAT but contains an updated processor enabling complete automation, revealed the two tests to be functionally equivalent. Thus, the RVNAT(SP) is a fully automated sample-to-result test capable of reliable detection of select respiratory viruses directly from clinical specimens in 3.5 h.

Indexed as

NanoparticlesOligonucleotide ProbesHumansInfluenza A virusInfluenza B virusMicroarray AnalysisNasopharynxRespiratory Syncytial VirusesRespiratory Tract InfectionsRNA, ViralSensitivity and SpecificityVirologyVirus DiseasesOligonucleotide ProbesRNA, Viral

Identifiers

PMID20826644
PMCPMC3020893

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.