Skip to main content
. 2020 Apr 23;58(5):e02096-19. doi: 10.1128/JCM.02096-19

TABLE 2.

Summary of discrepant results between the standard-of-care (SOC) testing or spiked organism and the ePlex BCID-FP panel runn

Species SOC positive/BCID-FP negative PCR/sequencing Interpretation SOC negative/BCID-FP positive PCR/sequencing Interpretation
C. albicans
    Clinical sample (Retrospective) 1 Positive for C. albicans False negative
    Contrived sample 1a ND False negative 1b ND False positive
C. glabrata
    Clinical sample (Retrospective) 1c Negative for C. glabrata Indeterminate 2d Positive for C. glabrata True positive
C. guillermondii
    Contrived sample 1e ND False negative
C. kefyr
    Contrived sample 2f ND False positive
C. lusitaniae
    Clinical sample (Retrospective) 1 Positive for C. lusitaniae False negative
    Contrived sample 1g ND False positive
C. parapsilosis
    Clinical sample (Retrospective) 1h Positive for C. parapsilosis False negative 1i Positive for C. parapsilosis True positive
C. tropicalis
    Clinical sample (Retrospective) 1j Positive for C. tropicalis True positive
Fusarium spp.
    Contrived sample 1k ND False negative
Rhodotorula spp.
    Contrived sample 2l ND False negative 1m ND False positive
Total 9 9
a

The sample was spiked with C. albicans ATCC10231. It was flagged positive on day 6 but was negative by the BCID-FP panel.

b

The sample was spiked with C. dubliniensis ATCCMYA-578. C. dubliniensis was correctly detected by the BCID-FP panel, but the sample was also positive for C. albicans and C. kefyr (same sample discussed in footnote f).

c

The sample grew C. albicans, C. glabrata, and C. dubliniensis. The BCID-FP panel detected C. albicans, C. dubliniensis, but not C. glabrata. Subsequently, C. glabrata was not detected in the residual of that sample by PCR/sequencing. This sample is also listed as Case 1 in Table 3.

d

These two samples are also listed as Case 6 and 7 in Table 3.

e

The sample was spiked with C. guilliermondii ATCC90198. It was flagged positive on day 2 but was negative by the BCID-FP panel.

f

One sample was spiked with C. dubliniensis ATCCMYA-578. C. dubliniensis was correctly detected by the BCID-FP panel, but the sample was also positive for C. kefyr and C. albicans (same sample discussed in footnote b). The other sample was spiked with C. auris CDC number 0390. C. auris was correctly detected by the BCID-FP panel, but the sample was also positive for C. kefyr.

g

The sample was spiked with C. neoformans ATCC14116. C. neoformans was correctly detected by the BCID-FP panel, but the sample was also positive for C. lusitaniae.

h

This sample is also listed as Case 3 in Table 3.

i

This sample is also listed as Case 4 in Table 3.

j

This sample is also listed as Case 5 in Table 3.

k

The sample was spiked with Fusarium dimerum CBS110317. It was flagged positive on day 3 but was negative by BCID-FP Panel.

l

Two contrived samples were each spiked with Rhodotorula mucilaginosa ATCC66034 and R. mucilaginosa ATCC9449 and flagged positive on day 3 and day 6, respectively, but were negative by BCID-FP Panel.

m

The sample was spiked with C. auris CDCnumber 0389. C. auris was correctly detected by BCID-FP Panel, but the sample was also positive for Rhodotorula.

n

ND, not done.