Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2007 Apr;45(4):1234-7.
doi: 10.1128/JCM.02202-06. Epub 2007 Feb 14.

Comparison of the MChip to viral culture, reverse transcription-PCR, and the QuickVue influenza A+B test for rapid diagnosis of influenza

Affiliations
Comparative Study

Comparison of the MChip to viral culture, reverse transcription-PCR, and the QuickVue influenza A+B test for rapid diagnosis of influenza

Martin Mehlmann et al. J Clin Microbiol. 2007 Apr.

Abstract

The performance of a diagnostic microarray (the MChip assay) for influenza was compared in a blind study to that of viral culture, reverse transcription (RT)-PCR, and the QuickVue Influenza A+B test. The patient sample data set was composed of 102 respiratory secretion specimens collected between 29 December 2005 and 2 February 2006 at Scott & White Hospital and Clinic in Temple, Texas. Samples were collected from a wide range of age groups by using direct collection, nasal/nasopharyngeal swabs, or nasopharyngeal aspiration. Viral culture and the QuickVue assay were performed at the Texas site at the time of collection. Aliquots for each sample, identified only by study numbers, were provided to the University of Colorado and Vanderbilt University teams for blinded analysis. When referenced to viral culture, the MChip exhibited a clinical sensitivity of 98% and a clinical specificity of 98%. When referenced to RT-PCR, the MChip assay exhibited a clinical sensitivity of 92% and a clinical specificity of 98%. While the MChip assay currently requires 7 to 8 h to complete the analysis, a significant advantage of the test for influenza virus-positive samples is simultaneous detection and full subtype identification for the two subtypes currently circulating in humans (A/H3N2 and A/H1N1) and avian (A/H5N1) viruses.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Atmar, R. L., B. D. Baxter, E. A. Dominguez, and L. H. Taber. 1996. Comparison of reverse transcription-PCR with tissue culture and other rapid diagnostic assays for detection of type A influenza virus. J. Clin. Microbiol. 34:2604-2606. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Boivin, G., I. Hardy, and A. Kress. 2001. Evaluation of a rapid optical immunoassay for influenza viruses (FLU OIA test) in comparison with cell culture and reverse transcription-PCR. J. Clin. Microbiol. 39:730-732. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Chomel, J. J., D. Pardon, D. Thouvenot, J. P. Allard, and M. Aymard. 1991. Comparison between three rapid methods for direct diagnosis of influenza and the conventional isolation procedure. Biologicals 19:287-292. - PubMed
    1. Committee on Government Reform, U.S. House of Representatives. 12 February 2004. Protecting the public's health: CDC influenza preparedness efforts. Testimony of Julie L. Gerberding before the Committee on Government Reform. http://www.hhs.gov/asl/testify/t040212a.html.
    1. Dawson, E. D., D. M. Dankbar, M. Mehlmann, C. L. Moore, M. B. Townsend, J. A. Smagala, C. B. Smith, N. J. Cox, R. D. Kuchta, and K. L. Rowlen. 2007. Identification of A/H5N1 influenza viruses using a single gene diagnostic microarray. Anal. Chem. 79:378-384. - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms