ArticleEuropean journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology2024
Retrospective and prospective evaluation of the FluoroType®-Mycobacteria VER 1.0 assay for the identification of mycobacteria from cultures in a French center.
Article in European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of the molecular FluoroType Mycobacteria VER 1.0 and the Maldi BioTyper Mycobacteria assays for the identification of non-tuberculous mycobacteria.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeRapid, reliable identification of mycobacteria from positive cultures is essential for patient management, particularly for the differential diagnosis of Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex (MTBC) and nontuberculous mycobacteria (NTM) species. The aim of the present study was to evaluate a new "In-Vitro-Diagnostic"-certified PCR kit, FluoroType®-Mycobacteria VER 1.0 (Hain Lifescience GmbH) for NTM and MTBC identification from cultures.
methodsMycobacteria identification isolated from positive cultures during routine practice at the Lyon university hospital mycobacteria laboratory obtained by hsp65 amplification/sequencing were compared retrospectively and prospectively to those obtained by and the FluoroType®-Mycobacteria VER 1.0 kit.
resultsThe overall agreement between hsp65 amplification/sequencing and the FluoroType®-Mycobacteria VER 1.0 kit was 88.4% (84/95); 91.2% (52/57) for the retrospective period and 84.2% (32/38) for the prospective period. There were 9 (9.5%) minor discrepancies (species in the FluoroType®-Mycobacteria VER 1.0 database and identified at genus level): 4 during the retrospective period, 5 during the prospective period; and 2 (2.1%) major discrepancies (species in the FluoroType®-Mycobacteria VER 1.0 database and identified incorrectly to species level): 1 during the retrospective period (M. kumamotonense identified as M. abscessus subsp massiliense by the kit) and 1 during the prospective period (M. chimaera identified as M. smegmatis by the kit). Including concordant results at genus level and minor discrepancies, 17.9% (17/95) of strains were identified as Mycobacterium sp. by the FluoroType®-Mycobacteria-VER 1.0 kit.
conclusionThe good performance of the FluoroType®-Mycobacteria-VER 1.0 kit with few major discrepancies could enable its use for first-line identification of positive mycobacteria cultures. However, an alternative identification method at least for reference laboratories is needed owing to the non-negligible proportion of NTM strains were identified at genus level.
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.