Evaluation of multiple test methods for the detection of the novel 2009 influenza A (H1N1) during the New York City outbreak

Ginocchio, Christine C.; Zhang, Frank; Manji, Ryhana; Arora, Suman; Bornfreund, Mark; Falk, Leon; Lotlikar, Madhavi; Kowerska, Margaret; Becker, G.; Korologos, Diamanto D.; Geronimo, Marcella De; Crawford, James M.

doi:10.1016/j.jcv.2009.06.005

Cited by 337 publications

(303 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

283

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Rapid antigen tests and direct immunofluorescence assays (DFA) do not distinguish between different influenza A virus subtypes, and therefore cannot confirm an isolate to be pandemic H1N1/ 09. Selected reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) systems as well as viral culture together with complementary tests have the ability to subtype influenza A virus strains (50).…”

Section: Laboratory Diagnosismentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Pandemic influenza A (H1N1) 2009: the experience of the first six months

Maritz

Maree²,

Preiser³

2009

Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

After a break of 41 years, 2009 saw the first influenza pandemic of the 21st century caused by a triple-reassortant influenza A (H1N1) virus. The current estimated case fatality rate is lower than that of previous influenza pandemics, but this may change as the pandemic evolves. Illness frequently occurs in previously healthy, young adults with a wide range of clinical presentations. The majority of circulating pandemic viruses remain susceptible to neuraminidase inhibitors, although all strains are intrinsically resistant to the adamantanes. Monovalent vaccines against the pandemic strain are available in both live attenuated and inactivated forms. This review aims to summarise important virological, epidemiological and clinical aspects of the pandemic influenza A (H1N1) virus for physicians and other clinical personnel. Clin Chem Lab Med 2010;48:11-21.

show abstract

Section: Laboratory Diagnosismentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Rapid antigen tests generally have low sensitivity (11%-69%) for detecting pandemic H1N1/09 (50)(51)(52)(53)(54). The sensitivity of all rapid tests decreased markedly with decreasing virus titres in specimens (51).…”

Section: Laboratory Diagnosismentioning

confidence: 99%

Pandemic influenza A (H1N1) 2009: the experience of the first six months

Maritz

Maree²,

Preiser³

2009

Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Previous studies have shown that RIDT sensitivity was correlated with increasing viral titer 2 , 6 , 7 and that higher RIDT sensitivity was found in younger age groups than older groups 3 , 5 , 8 , 9 . However, these studies were conducted either in pediatric patients or with a small sample of older patients.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…While these tests were developed and introduced prior to the emergence of influenza A(H1N1) 2009, clinicians have utilized these tests routinely to identify patients infected with influenza A(H1N1) 2009 and to make treatment decisions for those patients. Although the specificity of RIDTs as compared to real‐time RT‐PCR has been shown to be high (90–100%), substantial variation in testing sensitivity (17·8–76·7%) in detecting influenza A(H1N1) 2009 has been reported 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Detection of 2009 pandemic influenza A(H1N1) virus Infection in different age groups by using rapid influenza diagnostic tests

Gao¹,

Loring²,

Laviolette³

et al. 2011

Influenza Resp Viruses

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Please cite this paper as: Gao et al. (2011) Detection of 2009 pandemic influenza A(H1N1) virus Infection in different age groups by using rapid influenza diagnostic tests. Influenza and Other Respiratory Viruses 6(3), e30–e34. Background The performance of rapid influenza diagnostic tests (RIDTs) in detecting influenza A(H1N1) 2009 has varied widely. Evaluations of RIDTs among infected individuals across all age groups have not been described in depth. Objectives Determine RIDT clinical sensitivity in comparison with influenza detection using real‐time RT‐PCR among patients infected with influenza A(H1N1) 2009 across all age groups. Study design This study analyzed respiratory specimens received by the New Hampshire Public Health Laboratories (NHPHL) from September 1, 2009, through December 31, 2009. RIDT performance was evaluated among different age groups of patients determined to be infected with influenza A (H1N1) 2009, and the association between age and RIDT sensitivity was determined. Results Of 1373 specimens examined, 269 tested positive for influenza A(H1N1) 2009 by real‐time RT‐PCR (rRT‐PCR) and had RIDT results available. Overall clinical sensitivity and specificity of RIDTs were 53·9 and 98·5%, respectively. By age group, clinical sensitivity was 85·7% in patients <2 years old, 60·3% in patients between 2‐ and 39 years old, and 33·3% in patients aged 40 and older. Logistic regression analysis indicated that increasing age was negatively associated with RIDT performance. Conclusion Rapid influenza diagnostic test sensitivity decreased significantly with increasing age. Findings from this study may impact a clinician’s interpretation of RIDT test results and ultimately have implications in clinical decision‐making.

show abstract

“…In a large study assessing multiple tests, sensitivities of BinaxNOW® and 3MA + B® as compared to R-Mix culture for the detection of pandemic (H1N1) 2009 virus were 9.6% and 40%, respectively. However, in the latter study, the patient population included adults (mean age 13.7 years, range 2 weeks to 97 years) [7].…”

Section: Performance Of Influenzatop®mentioning

confidence: 99%

Performance characteristics of a rapid immunochromatographic assay for detection of pandemic influenza A (H1N1) virus in children

et al. 2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Rapid tests for diagnosis of influenza are valuable assets in the management of influenza in pediatric patients. However, test performance fluctuates with virus subtypes. We assessed the test characteristics of Influenzatop®, a rapid immunochromatographic influenza A and B test, in detecting pandemic 2009 influenza A (H1N1) in children up to 18 years of age, using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) as the gold standard. Three hundred and one pediatric outpatients with influenzalike illness were included into the study. Overall sensitivity of Influenzatop® was 64% (95% confidence interval (CI) 56-71%) but increased to 92% (95% CI, 80-97%) when performed between 24 and 48 h after onset of symptoms. Positive Influenzatop® results among RT-PCR-positive patients were associated with higher viral load. No significant variation in test performance could be detected when analyzed by age and high versus low prevalence period. Overall test specificity was 99% (95% CI, 95-100%); positive and negative predictive values were 98% (95% CI, 93-99%) and 70% (95% CI, 63-76%), respectively. Conclusion: Influenzatop® rapid influenza test is a sound tool in the diagnosis of H1N1 in pediatric patients when employed 24-48 h after onset of symptoms.

show abstract

Evaluation of multiple test methods for the detection of the novel 2009 influenza A (H1N1) during the New York City outbreak

Cited by 337 publications

References 6 publications

Pandemic influenza A (H1N1) 2009: the experience of the first six months

Pandemic influenza A (H1N1) 2009: the experience of the first six months

Detection of 2009 pandemic influenza A(H1N1) virus Infection in different age groups by using rapid influenza diagnostic tests

Performance characteristics of a rapid immunochromatographic assay for detection of pandemic influenza A (H1N1) virus in children

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About