Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32516739›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical virology : the official publication of the Pan American Society for Clinical Virology2020

Evaluation of the commercially available LightMix® Modular E-gene kit using clinical and proficiency testing specimens for SARS-CoV-2 detection.

Cyril Chik-Yan Yip, Siddharth Sridhar, Andrew Kim-Wai Cheng, Kit-Hang Leung, Garnet Kwan-Yue Choi, Jonathan Hon-Kwan Chen, Rosana Wing-Shan Poon, Kwok-Hung Chan, Alan Ka-Lun Wu, Helen Shuk-Ying Chan and 8 more

Open access · greenAbstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical virology : the official publication of the Pan American Society for Clinical Virology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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

30 citing papers in PubMed, 57 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Comparison between five PCR techniques for the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2.Revista espanola de quimioterapia : publicacion oficial de la Sociedad Espanola de Quimioterapia · 2022
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Comparison and correlation of commercial SARS-CoV-2 real-time-PCR assays, Ireland, June 2020.Euro surveillance : bulletin Europeen sur les maladies transmissibles = European communicable disease bulletin · 2021
    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

18 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.

Cyril Chik-Yan YipDepartment of Microbiology, Queen Mary Hospital, Pokulam, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China.
Siddharth SridharState Key Laboratory of Emerging Infectious Diseases, The University of Hong Kong, Pokfulam, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China; Department of Microbiology, Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Pokfulam, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China; Carol Yu Centre for Infection, The University of Hong Kong, Pokfulam, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China.
Andrew Kim-Wai ChengDepartment of Microbiology, Queen Mary Hospital, Pokulam, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China.
Kit-Hang LeungDepartment of Microbiology, Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Pokfulam, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China.
Garnet Kwan-Yue ChoiDepartment of Microbiology, Queen Mary Hospital, Pokulam, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China.
Jonathan Hon-Kwan ChenDepartment of Microbiology, Queen Mary Hospital, Pokulam, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China.
Rosana Wing-Shan PoonDepartment of Microbiology, Queen Mary Hospital, Pokulam, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China.
Kwok-Hung ChanState Key Laboratory of Emerging Infectious Diseases, The University of Hong Kong, Pokfulam, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China; Department of Microbiology, Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Pokfulam, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China; Carol Yu Centre for Infection, The University of Hong Kong, Pokfulam, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China.
Alan Ka-Lun WuDepartment of Clinical Pathology, Pamela Youde Nethersole Eastern Hospital, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China.
Helen Shuk-Ying ChanDepartment of Medicine, Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China.
Sandy Ka-Yee ChauDepartment of Pathology, United Christian Hospital, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China.
Tom Wai-Hin ChungDepartment of Microbiology, Queen Mary Hospital, Pokulam, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China.
Kelvin Kai-Wang ToState Key Laboratory of Emerging Infectious Diseases, The University of Hong Kong, Pokfulam, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China; Department of Microbiology, Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Pokfulam, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China; Carol Yu Centre for Infection, The University of Hong Kong, Pokfulam, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China.
Owen Tak-Yin TsangDepartment of Medicine and Geriatrics, Princess Margaret Hospital, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China.
Ivan Fan-Ngai HungDepartment of Medicine, Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Pokfulam, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China.
Vincent Chi-Chung ChengDepartment of Microbiology, Queen Mary Hospital, Pokulam, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China.
Kwok-Yung YuenState Key Laboratory of Emerging Infectious Diseases, The University of Hong Kong, Pokfulam, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China; Department of Microbiology, Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Pokfulam, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China; Carol Yu Centre for Infection, The University of Hong Kong, Pokfulam, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China; Hainan Medical University-The University of Hong Kong Joint Laboratory of Tropical Infectious Diseases, The University of Hong Kong, Pokfulam, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China. Electronic address: kyyuen@hku.hk.
Jasper Fuk-Woo ChanState Key Laboratory of Emerging Infectious Diseases, The University of Hong Kong, Pokfulam, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China; Department of Microbiology, Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Pokfulam, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China; Carol Yu Centre for Infection, The University of Hong Kong, Pokfulam, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China; Hainan Medical University-The University of Hong Kong Joint Laboratory of Tropical Infectious Diseases, The University of Hong Kong, Pokfulam, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China. Electronic address: jfwchan@hku.hk.
Queen Mary Hospital · CNUniversity of Hong Kong · HKHainan Medical University · CNPamela Youde Nethersole Eastern Hospital · CNQueen Elizabeth Hospital · CNUnited Christian Hospital · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRapid and sensitive diagnostic assays for SARS-CoV-2 detection are required for prompt patient management and infection control. The analytical and clinical performances of LightMix® Modular SARS and Wuhan CoV E-gene kit, a widely used commercial assay for SARS-CoV-2 detection, have not been well studied.

objectiveTo evaluate the performance characteristics of the LightMix® E-gene kit in comparison with well-validated in-house developed COVID-19 RT-PCR assays. STUDY

designSerial dilutions of SARS-CoV-2 culture isolate extracts were used for analytical sensitivity evaluation. A total of 289 clinical specimens from 186 patients with suspected COVID-19 and 8 proficiency testing (PT) samples were used to evaluate the diagnostic performance of the LightMix® E-gene kit against in-house developed COVID-19-RdRp/Hel and COVID-19-N RT-PCR assays.

resultsThe LightMix® E-gene kit had a limit of detection of 1.8 × 10

conclusionsThe LightMix® E-gene kit is a rapid and sensitive assay for SARS-CoV-2 detection. It has fewer verification requirements compared to laboratory-developed tests.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overBetacoronavirusClinical Laboratory TechniquesCoronavirus InfectionsCOVID-19COVID-19 TestingFemaleHumansLimit of DetectionMaleMiddle AgedMolecular Diagnostic TechniquesPandemicsRNA, ViralCOVID-19DiagnosticEvaluationLightMix E-genePCRSARS-CoV-2

Identifiers

PMID32516739
PMCPMC7255195
OpenAlexW3031486886

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.