Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24088862›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology2013

Multicenter evaluation of the Verigene Clostridium difficile nucleic acid assay.

Karen C Carroll, Blake W Buchan, Sokha Tan, Paul D Stamper, Katherine M Riebe, Preeti Pancholi, Cheryl Kelly, Arundhati Rao, Robert Fader, Robert Cavagnolo and 5 more

Open access · bronzeAbstract readComparative StudyEvaluation StudyMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical microbiology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.6field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 36 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Laboratory Tests for the Diagnosis ofClinics in colon and rectal surgery · 2020
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Current knowledge on the laboratory diagnosis ofWorld journal of gastroenterology · 2017
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. 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

15 authors at 7 institutions in 1 country.

Karen C CarrollDepartment of Pathology, the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine.
Blake W Buchan
Sokha Tan
Paul D Stamper
Katherine M Riebe
Preeti Pancholi
Cheryl Kelly
Arundhati Rao
Robert Fader
Robert Cavagnolo
Wendy Watson
Richard V Goering
Ernest A Trevino
Alice S Weissfeld
Nathan A Ledeboer
Medical College of Wisconsin · USDermatology Specialists · USJohns Hopkins University · USScott & White Memorial Hospital · USThe Ohio State University · USCHI Health Creighton University Medical Center - Bergan Mercy · USJohns Hopkins Hospital · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The Verigene Clostridium difficile Nucleic Acid test (Verigene CDF test) (Nanosphere, Northbrook, IL) is a multiplex qualitative PCR assay that utilizes a nanoparticle-based array hybridization method to detect C. difficile tcdA and tcdB in fecal specimens. In addition, the assay detects binary toxin gene sequences and the single base pair deletion at nucleotide 117 (Δ 117) in tcdC to provide a presumptive identification of the epidemic strain 027/NAP1/BI (referred to here as ribotype 027). This study compared the Verigene CDF test with anaerobic direct and enriched toxigenic culture on stool specimens from symptomatic patients among five geographically diverse laboratories within the United States. The Verigene CDF test was performed according to the manufacturer's instructions, and the reference methods performed by a central laboratory included direct culture onto cycloserine cefoxitin fructose agar (CCFA) and enriched culture using cycloserine cefoxitin mannitol broth with taurocholate and lysozyme. Recovered isolates were identified as C. difficile using gas liquid chromatography and were tested for toxin using a cell culture cytotoxicity neutralization assay. Strains belonging to ribotype 027 were determined by PCR ribotyping and bidirectional sequencing for Δ 117 in tcdC. A total of 1,875 specimens were evaluable. Of these, 275 specimens (14.7%) were culture positive by either direct or enriched culture methods. Compared to direct culture alone, the overall sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value for the Verigene CDF test were 98.7%, 87.5%, 42%, and 99.9%, respectively. Compared to combined direct and enriched culture results, the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive values of the Verigene CDF test were 90.9%, 92.5%, 67.6%, and 98.3%, respectively. Of the 250 concordantly culture-positive specimens, 59 (23.6%) were flagged as "hypervirulent"; 53 were confirmed as ribotype 027, and all 59 possessed Δ 117 in tcdC. Time to results was approximately 2.5 h per specimen. The Verigene CDF test is a novel nucleic acid microarray that reliably detects both C. difficile toxins A and B in unformed stool specimens and appears to adequately identify ribotype 027 isolates.

Indexed as

Bacterial ToxinsBacteriological TechniquesCell Culture TechniquesChromatography, GasClostridioides difficileClostridium InfectionsDNA, BacterialEnteritisFecesHumansMolecular Diagnostic TechniquesPredictive Value of TestsProspective StudiesRibotypingSensitivity and SpecificityUnited StatesBacterial ToxinsDNA, Bacterial

Identifiers

PMID24088862
PMCPMC3838056
OpenAlexW2157697201

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.