Journal of Clinical MicrobiologyMicrobiologyPeer-reviewed journal article
Performance of Abbott ID NOW COVID-19 rapid nucleic acid amplification test in nasopharyngeal swabs transported in viral media and dry nasal swabs, in a New York City academic institution
A. Basu, T. Zinger, K. Inglima, K.-m. Woo, O. Atie, L. Yurasits, B. See, M. E. Aguero-Rosenfeld
Abstract
The recent emergence of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has posed formidable challenges for clinical laboratories seeking reliable laboratory diagnostic confirmation. The swift advance of the crisis in the United States has led to Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) facilitating the availability of molecular diagnostic assays without the more rigorous examination to which tests are normally subjected prior to FDA approval. Our laboratory currently uses two real time RT-PCR platforms, the Roche Cobas SARS-CoV2 and the Cepheid Xpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2. Both platforms demonstrate comparable performance; however, the run times for each assay are 3.5 hours and 45 minutes, respectively. In search for a platform with shorter turnaround time, we sought to evaluate the recently released Abbott ID NOW COVID-19 assay which is capable of producing positive results in as little as 5 minutes. We present here the results of comparisons between Abbott ID NOW COVID-19 and Cepheid Xpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2 using nasopharyngeal swabs transported in viral transport media and comparisons between Abbott ID NOW COVID-19 and Cepheid Xpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2 using nasopharyngeal swabs transported in viral transport media for Cepheid and dry nasal swabs for Abbott ID NOW. Regardless of method of collection and sample type, Abbott ID NOW COVID-19 had negative results in a third of the samples that tested positive by Cepheid Xpert Xpress when using nasopharyngeal swabs in viral transport media and 45% when using dry nasal swabs.
Reproducibility ledger
Nobody has reported trying to reproduce this paper yet. Did you replicate an experiment or run the code? Your report saves the next lab a week.
Sign in to file a reproducibility report.
Related papers
- Comparison of Cepheid Xpert Xpress and Abbott ID Now to Roche cobas for the Rapid Detection of SARS-CoV-2
M. C. Smithgall, I. Scherberkova, … D. Green·bioRxiv·Apr 22, 2020
- Comparative study of four SARS-CoV-2 Nucleic Acid Amplification Test (NAAT) platforms demonstrates that ID NOW performance is impaired substantially by patient and specimen type.
P. R. Lephart, M. A. Bachman, … D. W. Newton·bioRxiv·Jun 4, 2020
- Comparison of the NeuMoDX, Diasorin Simplexa, Cepheid and Roche CDC SARS-CoV 2 EUA assays using nasopharyngeal/nasal swabs in universal transport media (UTM) and sputum and tracheal aspirates
R. J. Tibbetts, K. Callahan, … L. P. Samuel·bioRxiv·May 26, 2020
- Validation and Comparison of a Modified CDC Assay with two Commercially Available Assays for the Detection of SARS-CoV-2 in Respiratory Specimen
A. Lima, V. Healer, … S. Silbert·bioRxiv·Jun 29, 2020
- SwabExpress: An end-to-end protocol for extraction-free COVID-19 testing
Sanjay R Srivatsan, Sarah Heidl, … Jason S. Debley·Clinical ChemistryPeer-reviewed·Jun 30, 2021
- Rapid direct nucleic acid amplification test without RNA extraction for SARS-CoV-2 using a portable PCR thermocycler
S. K. Wee, S. P. Sivalingam, E. P. H. Yap·bioRxiv·Apr 17, 2020