Back to Search Start Over

Comparison between Aptima Assays (Hologic) and the Allplex STI Essential Assay (Seegene) for the diagnosis of Sexually transmitted infections.

Authors :
de Salazar A
Espadafor B
Fuentes-López A
Barrientos-Durán A
Salvador L
Álvarez M
García F
Source :
PloS one [PLoS One] 2019 Sep 12; Vol. 14 (9), pp. e0222439. Date of Electronic Publication: 2019 Sep 12 (Print Publication: 2019).
Publication Year :
2019

Abstract

Sexually transmitted infections (STIs) remain a worldwide problem and a severe threat to public health. The purpose of this study was to compare Aptima® Assays (Hologic®) and the Allplex™ STI Essential Assay (Seegene®) for the simultaneous detection of Chlamydia trachomatis, Neisseria gonorrhoeae, Trichomonas vaginalis and Mycoplasma genitalium in clinical practice. The Aptima® assays (Hologic®) are based on a transcription-mediated amplification (TMA) method. The Allplex™ STI Essential assay (Seegene®) is based on a multiplex Real-Time PCR (RT-PCR) method. A total of 622 clinical samples from different anatomical sites were tested using both methods. A total of 88 (14.1%) and 66 (10.6%) positive samples were found for any of the TMA assays used and for the RT-PCR assay, respectively. Aptima® assays showed a slightly higher rate of positive results for all pathogens except for T. vaginalis, the results of which were similar to those obtained with Allplex™. The most commonly detected pathogen was C. trachomatis (37 samples; 5.9% using TMA assays) and the anatomical site with the highest prevalence of microorganisms was a non-urogenital site, the pharynx (27 positive samples; 4.3%). Using the Aptima® assays as reference method, the comparison showed that the average specificity of multiplex RT-PCR was 100.0% for the four pathogens. However an average sensitivity of 74.5% was observed, showing 95.2% (CI95%; 93.6-96.9) of overall concordance (κ = 0.80). In conclusion, the Aptima® assays show a higher sensitivity on a wide range of sample types compared to the Allplex™ assay.<br />Competing Interests: Federico García has received honoraria from Werfen, Hologic and Roche for participation in advisory boards and lectures related to the topic of the paper. This does not alter our adherence to PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials. The other authors declare no conflict of interest.

Details

Language :
English
ISSN :
1932-6203
Volume :
14
Issue :
9
Database :
MEDLINE
Journal :
PloS one
Publication Type :
Academic Journal
Accession number :
31513653
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0222439