ArticleDiagnostic microbiology and infectious disease2022
Presumptive positive with the Cepheid Xpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2 assay due to N mutations in the Delta variant.
Article in Diagnostic microbiology and infectious disease, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparing clinical utility of STANDARD M10 rapid rtRT-PCR assay with pooled testing for SARS-CoV-2 screening.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Prospective, multi-site evaluation of the Cepheid Xpert Xpress CoV-2Journal of clinical microbiology · 2024Article
- A mutation responsible for impaired detection by the Xpert SARS-CoV-2 assay independently emerged in different lineages during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic.BMC microbiology · 2023Article
- Comparison of SARS-CoV-2 virus detection using the Xpert Xpress rapid molecular test on Abbott M2000 Real-Time System: a cross-sectional study.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2023Article
- When rare becomes common: N2 gene-positive, E gene-negative SARS-CoV-2 PCR results between 2021 and 2022.Journal of clinical virology plus · 2023Article
- Cycle Threshold (Ct) Values of SARS-CoV-2 Detected with the GeneXpertCurrent issues in molecular biology · 2023Article
- Article
- Rapid Evaluation of the XpertDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The Cepheid Xpert® Xpress SARS-CoV-2 assay is 1 of the several real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) assays that received Emergency Use Authorization from the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for detection of SARS-CoV-2. Here we report 4 SARS-CoV-2 samples that were reported as presumptive positives on the Cepheid platform while reported as positives on alternative RT-PCR platforms. Whole genome sequencing indicated that the samples were Delta variants and had point mutations in the N gene which potentially interfered with SARS-CoV-2 detection. Two types of point mutations were found in these samples in the US CDC 2019-nCoV Real time PCR N2 Probe region: C29203T and C29200T. C29203T is a novel point mutation, and C29200T has not been previously reported in the Delta variants. This underlines the fact that mutations in the real-time RT-PCR assay target region could hinder accurate detection of SARS-CoV-2.
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.