Comparable Detections of Viral Pathogens in Lower Respiratory Tract Specimens with the BioFire Respiratory Panel 2 and the BioFire Pneumonia Panel

Hughes, Andrew; Webber, Daniel; Wallace, Meghan A.; Johnson, Caitlin; Burnham, Carey‐Ann D.; Anderson, Neil W.

doi:10.1128/jcm.00254-20

Cited by 5 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Webber et al compared standard viral testing with BioFire PNplus Panel and demonstrated a 99.2% correlation [23]. Hughes et al found an 87% PPA and 100% NPA for BioFire PNplus Panel viral detections compared to BioFire® FilmArray® Respiratory 2 (RP2) Panel (BioFire Diagnostics, LLC) [30]. Virus detection in absence of a bacterial pathogen and in conjunction with clinical presentation, chest radiograph, and other diagnostic tests, such as a low procalcitonin, could support antimicrobial stewardship and discontinuation of antibiotics in the setting of CAP [31].…”

Section: Number and Type Of Microorganisms Reported By Soc Notmentioning

confidence: 99%

Multinational evaluation of the BioFire® FilmArray® Pneumonia plus Panel as compared to standard of care testing

Ginocchio

Garcia-Mondragon

Mauerhofer

et al. 2021

Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study compared standard of care testing (SOC) to BioFire® FilmArray® Pneumonia plus Panel (PNplus). PNplus detects 15 bacteria with semiquantitative log bin values, 7 antibiotic resistance markers, three atypical bacteria (AB), and eight viral classes directly from bronchoalveolar lavage-like specimens (BLS) and sputum-like specimens (SLS). Fifty-two laboratories from 13 European countries and Israel tested 1234 BLS and 1242 SLS with PNplus and SOC. Detection rates and number of pathogens/samples were compared for PNplus pathogens. PNplus bin values and SOC quantities were compared. Three thousand two hundred sixty-two bacteria in PNplus were detected by PNplus and/or SOC. SOC detected 57.1% compared to 95.8% for PNplus (p ≤ 0.0001). PNplus semiquantitative bin values were less than SOC, equal to SOC, or greater than SOC in 5.1%, 25.4%, and 69.6% of results, respectively. PNplus bin values were on average ≥ 1 log than SOC values (58.5% 1–2 logs; 11.0% 3–4 logs). PNplus identified 98.2% of MRSA and SOC 55.6%. SOC detected 73/103 AB (70.9%) and 134/631 viruses (21.2%). PNplus detected 93/103 AB (90.3%) and 618/631 viruses (97.9%) (p ≤ 0.0001). PNplus and SOC mean number of pathogens/samples were 1.99 and 1.44, respectively. All gram-negative resistance markers were detected. PNplus and SOC results were fully or partially concordant for 49.1% and 26.4% of specimens, respectively. PNplus was highly sensitive and detected more potential pneumonia pathogens than SOC. Semiquantification may assist in understanding pathogen significance. As PNplus generates results in approximately 1 h, PNplus has potential to direct antimicrobial therapy in near real time and improve antimicrobial stewardship and patient outcomes.

show abstract

Section: Number and Type Of Microorganisms Reported By Soc Notmentioning

confidence: 99%

Multinational evaluation of the BioFire® FilmArray® Pneumonia plus Panel as compared to standard of care testing

Ginocchio

Garcia-Mondragon

Mauerhofer

et al. 2021

Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The NPA was 100% for both viral and atypical bacterial targets [38]. This study also reported that FilmArray PP identifies more typical bacterial pathogens in adult LRTI specimens than the FilmArray RP2 while retaining comparable performance for viral targets [38]. Evaluation of the FilmArray RP and the eSensor RV panel on LRTI specimens showed an overall agreement between the two methods to be 89.5% [36].…”

Section: Biofire Filmarray® Panelsmentioning

confidence: 58%

“…Performance evaluation of the FilmArray RP2 and FilmArray PP on the LRTI specimens showed PPA to be 87% for viral targets and 100% for atypical bacterial targets. The NPA was 100% for both viral and atypical bacterial targets [38]. This study also reported that FilmArray PP identifies more typical bacterial pathogens in adult LRTI specimens than the FilmArray RP2 while retaining comparable performance for viral targets [38].…”

Section: Biofire Filmarray® Panelsmentioning

confidence: 63%

“…BioFire respiratory panel version 2.1 released under the FDA Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) can also detect SARS-CoV-2. Multiple studies have evaluated this assay on the NPS samples for URTI [35], and ETA, SPT specimens for LRTI [36][37][38]. Performance evaluation of the FilmArray RP2 and FilmArray PP on the LRTI specimens showed PPA to be 87% for viral targets and 100% for atypical bacterial targets.…”

Section: Biofire Filmarray® Panelsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Application of Multiplex Molecular Assays in the Diagnosis of Acute Respiratory Infectious Diseases

Amjad¹

2021

IJMB

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Acute respiratory tract infections (ARTIs) are the most common diseases worldwide and an important cause of morbidity and mortality. Upper and lower respiratory tract infections are caused by a variety of bacterial, viral, and fungal pathogens. Clinical diagnosis of respiratory tract infections is challenging because of indistinguishable symptoms. Laboratory diagnosis is performed by serology, culture, electron microscopy, and immunological antigen detection assays. These conventional diagnostic procedures are time consuming, lack sensitivity, require special laboratory setup, and well-trained staff. In the clinical laboratories, multiplex molecular nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) are continuously replacing conventional diagnostic methods. This review summarizes and discusses the availability, clinical use, advantages and disadvantages of multiplex molecular methods in the detection and identification of ARTI pathogens. The multiplex molecular assays can simultaneously detect 20 or more bacterial and viral pathogens and have the advantage of increased sensitivity, specificity, and rapid turn-around time. These assays are helpful in syndromic based testing in high risk patient population, particularly those who are immunocompromised, hospitalized and/or seen in the emergency department. Limitations of multiplex molecular assays include inability to detect all the possible pathogens that can be present, not being able to differentiate between asymptomatic carriers and true infections, and sometimes results are difficult to interpret. Furthermore, additional testing may be required as these assays do not provide any information regarding antimicrobial susceptibility profile. Rapid and accurate diagnosis of respiratory tract infections leads to better treatment decisions, reduction in the further diagnostic procedures, length of hospital stay, better infection control measures, and associated healthcare costs.

show abstract

“…The results of both assays were fully concordant. A similar study was pursued by Hughes and co-authors to evaluate the performance of the RP2 for viral pathogen detection in LRT specimens, using the BIOFIRE Pneumonia Panel as comparator [ 32 ]. A total of 200 LRT specimens were enrolled, encompassing bronchoalveolar lavage fluid, bronchial wash, sputum and tracheal aspirate.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Clinical Evaluation of the BIOFIRE SPOTFIRE Respiratory Panel

Chan,

Ho,

Chan

et al. 2024

Viruses

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The BIOFIRE SPOTFIRE Respiratory (R) Panel is a novel, in vitro diagnostic PCR assay with 15 pathogen targets. The runtime is about 15 min which is the shortest among similar panels in the market. We evaluated the performance of the SPOTFIRE R Panel with 151 specimens, including 133 collected from the upper respiratory tract (URT), 13 from the lower respiratory tract (LRT) and 5 external quality assessment program (EQAP) samples. The respiratory specimens were enrolled throughout the first two post-COVID-19 influenza seasons in Hong Kong (March to December 2023). For URT specimens, full concordance was observed between the SPOTFIRE R Panel and the standard-of-care FilmArray Respiratory 2.1 plus Panel (RP2.1plus) for 109 specimens (109/133, 81.95%). After discrepant analysis, the SPOTFIRE R Panel identified more pathogens than the RP2.1plus in 15 specimens and vice versa in 3 specimens. The per-target negative and positive percentage agreement (NPA and PPA) were 92.86–100% except the PPA of adenovirus (88.24%). For LRT and EQAP samples, all results were fully concordant. To conclude, the performance of the SPOTFIRE R Panel was comparable to the RP2.1plus.

show abstract

Comparable Detections of Viral Pathogens in Lower Respiratory Tract Specimens with the BioFire Respiratory Panel 2 and the BioFire Pneumonia Panel

Cited by 5 publications

References 14 publications

Multinational evaluation of the BioFire® FilmArray® Pneumonia plus Panel as compared to standard of care testing

Multinational evaluation of the BioFire® FilmArray® Pneumonia plus Panel as compared to standard of care testing

Application of Multiplex Molecular Assays in the Diagnosis of Acute Respiratory Infectious Diseases

Clinical Evaluation of the BIOFIRE SPOTFIRE Respiratory Panel

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About