Background: Unambiguous clinical interpretation of PCR results for urinary tract infections (UTIs) remains a challenge. Here we compare and correlate multiplex qPCR results (quantification cycle values) with traditional microbial culture results (colony forming units) for clinical samples. Methods: Serial dilutions [10⁸ to 10⁰ colony forming units (CFU)/mL] were performed on five Gram-negative and two Gram-positive UTI-causing bacterial pathogens. For each dilution, quantitative cultures on solid media to confirm CFU/mL values and a real-time PCR UTI panel employing a nanofluidic Open Array^TM platform producing quantification cycle (Cq) values were performed. Cq values were correlated with CFU/mL values, generating a semi-quantitative interpretive scale for clinical samples. The clinical utility of the scale was then assessed using PCR and culture data from 168 clinical urine samples. Results: For Gram-negative bacteria, Cq values of 28 corresponded with ≥10⁵ CFU/mL, <10⁵ CFU/mL and negative cultures, respectively. For Gram-positive bacteria, Cq values of 30 corresponded with ≥10⁵ CFU/mL, <10⁵ CFU/mL and negative cultures, respectively. Among 168 urine specimens (including 138 Gram-negative and 30 Gram-positive bacteria), there was 83.3% agreement (n = 140/168) and 16.6% non-agreement (n = 28/168) between culture CFU/mL and qPCR Cq. Gram-negative bacteria had higher agreement (87.6%, 121/138) than Gram-positive bacteria (63.3%, 19/30). Conclusions: This study demonstrates that qPCR Cq results can be directly correlated with traditional urine quantitative culture results and reliably identify the clinically relevant cutoff of 10⁵ CFU/mL for detected uropathogens.

While COVID-19 has dominated Influenza-like illness (ILI) over the past few years, there are many other pathogens responsible for ILI. It is not uncommon to have coinfections with multiple pathogens in patients with ILI. The goal of this study was to identify the different organisms in symptomatic patients presenting with ILI using two different high throughput multiplex real time PCR platforms. Specimens were collected from 381 subjects presenting with ILI symptoms. All samples (nasal and nasopharyngeal swabs) were simultaneously tested on two expanded panel PCR platforms: Applied Biosystems™ TrueMark™ Respiratory Panel 2.0, OpenArray™ plate (OA) (32 viral and bacterial targets); and Applied Biosystems™ TrueMark™ Respiratory Panel 2.0, TaqMan™ Array card (TAC) (41 viral, fungal, and bacterial targets). Results were analyzed for concordance between the platforms and for identification of organisms responsible for the clinical presentation including possible coinfections. Very good agreement was observed between the two PCR platforms with 100% agreement for 12 viral and 3 bacterial pathogens. Of 381 specimens, approximately 58% of the samples showed the presence of at least one organism with an important incidence of co-infections (~36–40% of positive samples tested positive for two and more organisms). S. aureus was the most prevalent detected pathogen (~30%) followed by SARS-CoV-2 (~25%), Rhinovirus (~15%) and HHV6 (~10%). Co-infections between viruses and bacteria were the most common (~69%), followed by viral-viral (~23%) and bacterial-bacterial (~7%) co-infections. These results showed that coinfections are common in RTIs suggesting that syndromic panel based multiplex PCR tests could enable the identification of pathogens contributing to coinfections, help guide patient management thereby improving clinical outcomes and supporting antimicrobial stewardship.

Objectives: Following the COVID-19 pandemic, global epidemiological trends demonstrate a return to pre-pandemic levels of respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) and influenza (Flu) A/B viruses. For the appropriate clinical management of viral infections, reliable and timely diagnosis is crucial. The clinical presentation of these respiratory viral infections shows significant overlaps; thus, the syndromic diagnosis of these infections becomes challenging. The goal of this study was to compare the performance of three multiplex real-time PCR-based platforms for the detection of SARS-CoV-2, Flu A, Flu B, and RSV. Materials and Methods: A retrospective study was performed on 200 de-identified nasopharyngeal and oropharyngeal specimens. All samples were tested simultaneously on three PCR-based platforms for the detection of SARS-CoV-2, Flu A, Flu B, and RSV: HealthTrackRx’s real-time PCR Open Array^® respiratory panel, TrueMark™ SARS-CoV-2, Flu A, Flu B, RSV Select Panel, and BioFire^® RP2.1 Panel. The positive and negative predictive value of each test was evaluated at a 95% confidence interval. Results: Among the 200 tested samples, the TrueMark™ and OpenArray^® laboratory-developed tests (LDTs) showed a 100% concordance for the detection of SARS-CoV-2, Flu A, Flu B, and RSV. Overall agreement of 100% was observed for nasopharyngeal samples between the laboratory-developed tests and FDA-approved BioFire^® RP2.1 Panel. Diagnostic results for these four respiratory viruses, in clinical samples, between the LDTs and the FDA-approved comparator demonstrated full concordance. Conclusions: Respiratory viral infections represent one of the major global healthcare burdens. Consequently, the accurate detection and surveillance of these viruses are critical, particularly when these viruses are known to co-circulate. The excellent performance and full concordance of the LDTs, with the BioFire^® Respiratory RP2.1 panel, in detecting SARS-CoV-2, Flu A, Flu B, and RSV shows that these tests can be confidently implemented for the clinical testing of respiratory viral infections.

Background/Objectives: Vaginitis is a common infection among women of reproductive age. Although various diagnostic methodologies exist, diagnosis without the utilization of available diagnostic tests remains prevalent. This study aimed to assess downstream healthcare utilization and the cost of patients with and without diagnostic testing. Methods: This retrospective, observational study utilized the IQVIA PharMetrics^® Plus database from July 2020 to October 2023. Patients with an index claim (ICD-10 code indicating vaginitis) were categorized into two cohorts: those who received a syndromic polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test and those who had no documented test on the index date or within two days. Total and service-specific healthcare resource utilization and costs were assessed for 6 months following the index event. This study was designed to inform how Syndromic Vaginitis PCR testing is used to make treatment decisions and to track outpatient and inpatient healthcare utilization for 6 months post index date represented by cost. Results: Patients who received a Syndromic Vaginitis PCR test had significantly fewer outpatient medical services in the 6 months following initial diagnosis compared to those who received no diagnostic test. This was largely attributed to a substantial decrease in other medical service visits, resulting in mean cost savings of USD 2067 (Syndromic PCR = USD 6675, SD = USD 17,187; No Test = USD 8742, SD = USD 29,894) (p-value 0.0009). Conclusions: Many vaginitis patients do not receive testing, but Syndromic Vaginitis PCR testing may be an effective diagnostic tool for reducing costs associated with vaginitis infections.