ArticleInfluenza and other respiratory viruses2011
Use of dried clinical samples for storing and detecting influenza RNA.
Article in Influenza and other respiratory viruses, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMost clinical samples collected for diagnostic influenza testing and monitoring require refrigerated or frozen storage or shipment, which imparts logistic and cost burdens. The ability to store and ship dried clinical specimens under ambient conditions for influenza testing would significantly reduce costs and protect samples from improper storage or equipment failure, especially in remote or resource-limited areas.
objectivesTo evaluate the collection and storage of dried clinical samples on a transport matrix (ViveST™, ST) for influenza RNA testing by real-time reverse-transcription PCR (RT-PCR).
methodsViral transport medium from swab or sputum samples was applied to ST, dried, and stored under ambient conditions from 2 days to 6 months. Additional aliquots of samples were frozen. Testing of frozen and ST-stored samples was performed using the WHO/CDC real-time influenza A (H1N1) RT-PCR protocol and compared to the Luminex xTAG RVP assay.
resultsST-stored samples yielded slightly higher threshold cycle values (median 2·54 cycles) compared to frozen samples tested in parallel. This difference was consistent regardless of viral input. There was no significant difference in signal recovery between samples stored for 1 week versus samples stored for 3 weeks, or from three samples stored for 6 months. Qualitatively, clinical specimens stored on ST were 100% concordant (36/36) with frozen samples for detecting the presence of influenza A RNA.
conclusionST-processed dried specimens produced similar rates of seasonal or novel 2009 HIN1 influenza RNA detection compared to conventional sample processing and thus presents a viable alternative to refrigerated or frozen samples.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.