Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34628158›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical virology : the official publication of the Pan American Society for Clinical Virology2021

Evaluation of the clinical and analytical performance of the Seegene allplex™ SARS-CoV-2 variants I assay for the detection of variants of concern (VOC) and variants of interests (VOI).

Mélissa Caza, Catherine A Hogan, Agatha Jassem, Natalie Prystajecky, Amir Hadzic, Amanda Wilmer

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical virology : the official publication of the Pan American Society for Clinical Virology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 19% 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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. 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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Mélissa CazaLarissa Yarr Medical Microbiology Laboratory, Kelowna General Hospital, Kelowna, British Columbia, Canada. Electronic address: Melissa.Caza@interiorhealth.ca.
Catherine A HoganBritish Columbia Centre for Disease Control Public Health Laboratory, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada; Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
Agatha JassemBritish Columbia Centre for Disease Control Public Health Laboratory, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada; Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
Natalie PrystajeckyBritish Columbia Centre for Disease Control Public Health Laboratory, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada; Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
Amir HadzicLarissa Yarr Medical Microbiology Laboratory, Kelowna General Hospital, Kelowna, British Columbia, Canada; Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
Amanda WilmerLarissa Yarr Medical Microbiology Laboratory, Kelowna General Hospital, Kelowna, British Columbia, Canada; Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
BC Centre for Disease Control · CAKelowna General Hospital · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHigh-throughput assays for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern (VOC) and interest (VOI) are a diagnostic alternative when whole genome sequencing (WGS) is unavailable or limited.

objectiveThis study evaluated the clinical and analytical performance of the Seegene Allplex™ SARS-CoV-2 Variants I assay, which detects the HV69/70 deletion, N501Y and E484K mutations of the S gene.

methodsGenotyping was evaluated on -871 SARS-CoV-2 RNA positive specimens, 408 nasopharyngeal (NP) swabs and 463 saline gargle (SG) specimens, with WGS used as the reference standard. Analytical performance was assessed including stability, reproducibility, limit of detection (LOD), cross-reactivity and interference with various respiratory microorganisms.

resultsThe clinical study revealed sensitivity of 100% (95% CI 99.27%-100%) and specificity of 100% (95% CI 98.99%-100%) for HV69/70 deletion, sensitivity of 100% (95% CI 99.55%-100%) and specificity of 100% (95% CI 93.73% - 100%) for N501Y, and sensitivity of 100% (95% CI 98.94% - 100%) and specificity of 98.10% (95% CI 96.53% - 99.08%) for E484K mutation. The E484Q mutation was detected in 10 specimens of the Kappa variant (B.1.627.1). Analytical performance demonstrated stability and reproducibility over 7 days, and LOD was calculated at 698 cp/mL for NP swab specimens, and 968 cp/mL for SG specimens. No interference or cross-reactivity with other microorganisms was noted.

conclusionThe Allplex™ SARS-CoV-2 Variants I assay is acceptable for clinical use for the detection of variant of concern and variant of interest.

Indexed as

COVID-19SARS-CoV-2HumansReproducibility of ResultsRNA, ViralRNA, ViralCOVID-19diagnosticRT-PCRSARS-CoV-2Variant of concern (VOC)Variant of interest (VOI)

Identifiers

PMID34628158
PMCPMC8487322
OpenAlexW3204043031

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.