ライフサイエンスコーパス: NAAT

1 NAAT identified 13 (0.1%) of the 12,338 HIV antibody-neg

2 NAAT-negative patients (with and without diarrhea) were

3 NAAT-positive stool samples were tested by an ultrasensi

4 NAATs are both rapid and sensitive.

5 NAATs offer less hands-on time, greater throughput, fast

6 NAATs perform well for detection of chlamydia and gonorr

7 Of 11 066 NAAT-tested patients, 457 were repeatedly NAAT-negative,

8 ectors and LTR genomes targeted in the HIV-1 NAAT caused the HIV-1 NAAT false-positive results.

9 targeted in the HIV-1 NAAT caused the HIV-1 NAAT false-positive results.

10 Of the 61 specimens positive by at least 1 NAAT but negative by culture, 24 (39.3%) were positive b

11 Follow-up testing of 12 of the 13 NAAT-positive individuals at 6 months demonstrated 12 se

12 There were 64 NAAT-positive and 234 NAAT-negative samples.

13 We assumed a NAAT cost of US$25, NAAT specificity of 99.6%, NAAT sensitivity of 100% for

14 and 1 in-house HIV test (6 EIA, 4 RT, and 3 NAAT) on panels of plasma samples from HIV-infected (n =

15 y culture, 24 (39.3%) were positive by all 3 NAATs, suggesting that they represent true positives (TP

16 21.6%) by culture, while at least 1 of the 3 NAATs was positive for GBS in 155 specimens (31.0%).

17 y used the consensus of results with those 3 NAATs as the comparator.

18 Of the 32 NAAT(+)/Clarity(-) and 4 NAAT(-)/Clarity(+) samples, the

19 Of the 32 NAAT(+)/Clarity(-) and 4 NAAT(-)/Clarity(+) samples, there were 26 CCNA(-) and 4

20 AT cost of US$25, NAAT specificity of 99.6%, NAAT sensitivity of 100% for infants infected in pregnan

21 There were 64 NAAT-positive and 234 NAAT-negative samples.

22 We assumed a NAAT cost of US$25, NAAT specificity of 99.6%, NAAT sens

23 on, who has been a consistent advocate for a NAAT-only approach for CDI diagnosis, will discuss the v

24 r CDI diagnosis, will discuss the value of a NAAT-only approach, while Christopher Polage of the Univ

25 Until a NAAT for T. vaginalis is commercially available, a stepw

26 in validated samples is not required for all NAATs, although initial assay-specific evaluation is jus

27 4%), but culture was less sensitive than all NAATs (67% to 73%).

28 onfirmed as true positives by an alternative NAAT.

29 f three transcription-mediated amplification NAATs targeting unique regions of M. genitalium 16S or 2

30 Median toxin A, toxin B, toxin A + B, and NAAT cycle threshold (Ct) values in CDI-NAAT and carrier

31 The clinical specificity of Clarity and NAAT was 97.4% and 89.0%, respectively, and overdiagnosi

32 We compared toxin- positive and NAAT-positive-only CDI across geographically diverse sit

33 d mortality rates between toxin-positive and NAAT-positive-only CDI that were detected by an algorith

34 y, culture, drug susceptibility testing, and NAAT.

35 xin(+) patients than in NAAT(+)/toxin(-) and NAAT(-)/toxin(-) patients.

36 For FCU samples from men, any NAAT can be used for confirmation.

37 idence regarding this commercially available NAAT for testing of specimens after mailing.

38 will update us on the commercially available NAAT systems and explain what their role should be in th

39 performance of three commercially available NAATs (Becton-Dickinson ProbeTec SDA, Gen-Probe Aptima C

40 Currently available NAATs are more sensitive for the detection of chlamydial

41 In conclusion, currently available NAATs are more sensitive than culture for the detection

42 -based NAAT (Aptima Combo 2) and a DNA-based NAAT (Cobas 4800).

43 r RNA-based NAAT and 1-15 days for DNA-based NAAT.

44 howed 100% concordance with laboratory-based NAAT.

45 cutive days, and analyzed using an RNA-based NAAT (Aptima Combo 2) and a DNA-based NAAT (Cobas 4800).

46 days, with a range of 1-7 days for RNA-based NAAT and 1-15 days for DNA-based NAAT.

47 therapy, when using modern RNA- or DNA-based NAATs, respectively.

48 earance when using modern RNA- and DNA-based NAATs.

49 improved sensitivities compared to DNA-based NAATs; and the progression of scarring has now been char

50 luorophore-labeled probe types in a biplexed NAAT in a glass fiber membrane; and (2) analyzing the di

51 d strategy for real-time imaging of biplexed NAATs in paper.

52 on of Altona with a laboratory-developed BKV NAAT assay in IU/ml versus copies/ml using Passing-Bablo

53 ble to the primary standard to harmonize BKV NAAT results, we anticipate improved interassay comparis

54 specimens were tested simultaneously in both NAATs following broth enrichment.

55 A third tie-breaker NAAT resolved all but three of the discordant results in

56 ity of infection than total load measured by NAAT.

57 tic support in patients who test negative by NAAT but remain clinically suspicious for COVID-19.

58 e percent and 22% of the samples positive by NAAT and TC, respectively, were negative by the toxin B

59 -positive samples, 24 (96%) were positive by NAAT, whereas 25 of 25 true-negative samples (100%) show

60 tive by toxin EIA and 98% tested positive by NAAT.

61 tive by toxin EIA and 98% tested positive by NAAT.

62 (1.5%) of 66 control samples was positive by NAAT.

63 stool specimens already tested routinely by NAAT.

64 = 5) were tested for C. trachomatis rRNA by NAAT.

65 ion of C. trachomatis in ocular specimens by NAAT was verified for laboratory diagnosis.

66 l groups comprised 513 persons not tested by NAAT: 160 healthy laboratory employees, 101 persons posi

67 samples that were C. trachomatis negative by NAATs, 33/45 and 197/212 were correctly identified by th

68 1,000 self-collected vaginal swabs tested by NAATs, the sensitivities for C. trachomatis and N. gonor

69 The prevalence of C. trachomatis by NAATs was 17.5%.

70 Carrier-NAAT patients had positive stool NAAT but no diarrhea.

71 22 (65%) CDI-NAAT and 34 of 44 (77%) carrier-NAAT had toxin A + B concentration >=20 pg/mL (clinical

72 tions in both CDI-NAAT (n = 122) and carrier-NAAT (n = 44) cohorts spanned 5 logs (0 pg/mL to >100000

73 hreshold (Ct) values in CDI-NAAT and carrier-NAAT cohorts were similar (toxin A, 50.6 vs 60.0 pg/mL,

74 CDI-NAAT patients had clinically significant diarrhea and po

75 Seventy-nine of 122 (65%) CDI-NAAT and 34 of 44 (77%) carrier-NAAT had toxin A + B con

76 Patients enrolled as CDI-NAAT had clinically significant diarrhea and a positive

77 Stool toxin concentrations in both CDI-NAAT (n = 122) and carrier-NAAT (n = 44) cohorts spanned

78 and NAAT cycle threshold (Ct) values in CDI-NAAT and carrier-NAAT cohorts were similar (toxin A, 50.

79 efficacy evidence for the first FDA-cleared NAAT for M. genitalium detection in the United States.

80 ens were tested using culture and commercial NAATs employing transcription-mediated amplification (TM

81 CSF of immunocompetent adults for viral CSF NAAT assays would increase clinical specificity and pres

82 phone and droplet magnetofluidics to deliver NAAT in a portable and accessible format.

83 ory automation and the adoption of on-demand NAATs will allow for more streamlined processing of micr

84 fficacy evidence for two in vitro diagnostic NAATs that can detect the main causes of vaginitis.

85 AC2, SDA, or PCR were retested by different NAATs (SDA, PCR, AC2, and Aptima Neisseria gonorrhoeae a

86 C2; Digene Corp.) were retested by different NAATs (SDA, PCR, AC2, and the APTIMA assay for C. tracho

87 positive results were confirmed by different NAATs, but that some NAATs cannot be used to confirm oth

88 describing a direct comparison of different NAATs have been limited.

89 C2 results were confirmed by using different NAATs on the original specimen.

90 prospectively by toxin EIA, by C. difficile NAAT, and with a reference standard toxigenic culture.

91 Most current digital NAAT platforms, however, are limited to a "one-color-one

92 ity, we have developed a multiplexed digital NAAT platform, termed Droplet Digital Ratiometric Fluore

93 luorophores, and multiplexability of digital NAATs has therefore been limited.

94 al nucleic acid amplification tests (digital NAATs) have emerged as a popular tool for nucleic acid d

95 , cytomegalovirus (CMV), or enterovirus (EV) NAAT with CSF samples between 2008 and 2013 were include

96 Few NAAT studies reported adult-specific data, and none eval

97 With accounting for NAAT use, the adjusted estimate of the total burden of C

98 or DIAs, and 91.6% (CrI, 84.9% to 95.9%) for NAATs.

99 early phases of implementation planning for NAATs in the microbiology laboratory.

100 Results for NAATs performed on nasopharyngeal specimens and repeated

101 study, we evaluated the performance of four NAATs, qPCR, dPCR, real-time quantitative loop mediated

102 methods that reduced the in-lab TAT for GAS NAAT.

103 tube system and (ii) autoverification of GAS NAAT results in the laboratory information system.

104 esent robust biospecimens for N. gonorrhoeae NAAT testing and may not require confirmation when scree

105 However, the specificity of N. gonorrhoeae NAATs may be suboptimal, particularly for extragenital b

106 nd then examined the effects of implementing NAAT testing.

107 CDI relapse was more common in NAAT(+)/toxin(+) patients than in NAAT(+)/toxin(-) and N

108 sis was more than three times more common in NAAT(+)/toxin(-) than in NAAT(+)/toxin(+) patients.

109 imes more common in NAAT(+)/toxin(-) than in NAAT(+)/toxin(+) patients.

110 common in NAAT(+)/toxin(+) patients than in NAAT(+)/toxin(-) and NAAT(-)/toxin(-) patients.

111 or AHI case detection compared to individual NAAT.

112 s the role of future iterations of influenza NAATs and whether this testing would be available in a c

113 Introducing NAAT testing initially increases diagnoses, by finding a

114 Laboratory NAATs include onboard positive controls to reduce false

115 ce one or more of the benefits of laboratory NAATs, such as sensitivity, internal amplification contr

116 Staphylococcus aureus DNA) in our lab's "MD NAAT" platform, even in biplexed isothermal strand displ

117 evidence for the timing of TOC using modern NAATs is limited, we performed a prospective cohort stud

118 Most NAAT-positive rectal infections were culture positive, s

119 Previously, our group described a multiplex NAAT for the detection of dengue virus, Leptospira, and

120 analyzed 5 years of results for a multiplex NAAT targeting 14 respiratory viruses, to determine how

121 such as S. pyogenes, or commercial multiplex NAATs for detection of a variety of pathogens in gastroi

122 oach could be a new paradigm to evaluate new NAATs when there is no previously defined reference stan

123 f clinicians and biomedical researchers, new NAATs have developed to achieve ultrafast sample-to-answ

124 Now, there are numerous NAATs in the marketplace, and based on recent proficienc

125 d DNA sequencing for VVC, and a composite of NAAT and culture for T. vaginalis The prevalences of inf

126 However, limitations of NAAT approaches have recently become more apparent by re

127 r the detection of GBS, the sensitivities of NAAT, ChromID plus PM CDM at 48 h, and ChromID alone at

128 The specificities of NAAT, ChromID plus PM CDM, and ChromID alone were 97.7%,

129 with mild CDI and support the routine use of NAAT for the diagnosis of CDI.

130 ncluded (130 of RIDTs, 19 of DIAs, and 13 of NAATs).

131 tunately, the performance characteristics of NAATs have been determined largely with a few limited sp

132 flow and shortening the development cycle of NAATs, our platform may find use in point-of-care diagno

133 detection of TV by routine implementation of NAATs should result in better control of this common, tr

134 To improve the clinical specificity of NAATs, there has been a recent interest in using toxin g

135 this series, where she advocated the use of NAATs for influenza diagnosis.

136 ted diagnostic testing with increased use of NAATs when appropriate; routine follow-up visits within

137 erature conditions may impact the utility of NAATs in some settings and screening programs.

138 carriage, the diagnostic predictive value of NAATs is limited when used in patients with a low probab

139 Pooling samples into one NAAT container would cost the same as urogenital samples

140 whereas 31.5% were positive by at least one NAAT.

141 to NAAT) and classified as toxin positive or NAAT positive only.

142 t some NAATs cannot be used to confirm other NAATs.

143 used to confirm positive results from other NAATs.

144 and Drug Administration-cleared T. pallidum NAATs should be considered an immediate priority.

145 For parallel NAAT of OS and NPS samples in the second study, McNemar'

146 For CSA patients, NAATs are considered to be acceptable for identification

147 Sixty percent of women with rectal CT per NAAT were also culture positive.

148 Pooled NAAT (or group testing) can improve efficiency and test

149 eae patient was defined as > or = 2 positive NAAT results.

150 enrollment had at least 1 rectal CT-positive NAAT after clearance of the initial infection; none repo

151 ibiotics and did not have diarrhea; positive NAAT confirmed carriage.

152 The average duration of positive NAAT results was 6.8 weeks (range 2-16).

153 fined by detectable stool toxin (vs positive NAAT).

154 more positive results; >90% of all positive NAATs could be confirmed.

155 With >90% of all GC-positive NAATs being confirmed, our results show that confirmator

156 sensitive tests for T. vaginalis, preferably NAATs, if microscopy is negative.

157 Now S. pyogenes NAATs are being used with increasing frequency.

158 Patel of the Mayo Clinic, where S. pyogenes NAATs have been used for well over a decade with great s

159 Novel DIAs and rapid NAATs had markedly higher sensitivities for influenza A

160 tage points, except for influenza A by rapid NAATs (2.7 percentage points).

161 f enterovirus in CSF either by two reference NAATs or by viral culture.

162 66 NAAT-tested patients, 457 were repeatedly NAAT-negative, and serum samples were obtained for 18 su

163 investigational/research use only (IUO/RUO) NAATs for the detection of C. difficile toxin genes, the

164 ive specimens were then retested by the same NAAT for confirmation.

165 iagnostic Systems) were retested by the same NAAT.

166 g results for retested samples from a second NAAT (Xpert C. difficile/Epi test; Cepheid, Sunnyvale, C

167 Consequently, confirmation with a second NAAT is common, although this represents a burden on res

168 ion recommends that infants undergo a second NAAT to confirm any positive test result, but implementa

169 acid (NA) and species-specific NA sequences, NAATs have become the gold standard in a wide range of a

170 ith presumptive PTB in a low-burden setting, NAAT can reduce AII and is comparably sensitive, more sp

171 plification test (NAAT) results, or a single NAAT-positive result confirmed by an alternate amplifica

172 Compared to SOC NAATs, the positive agreement of the Xpert test was 219/

173 reviously analyzed by standard-of-care (SOC) NAATs.

174 confirmed by different NAATs, but that some NAATs cannot be used to confirm other NAATs.

175 However, for all other specimen types, some NAATs cannot be used to confirm positive results from ot

176 s have been targeted by T. pallidum-specific NAATs, with the majority of studies indicating that sens

177 Carrier-NAAT patients had positive stool NAAT but no diarrhea.

178 n of Trichomonas vaginalis by vaginal swabs; NAATs for detection of Neisseria gonorrhoeae and Chlamyd

179 that were negative by cytotoxicity assay/TC/NAAT, clinical cutoffs were set at 29.4 pg/ml (toxin A)

180 rming nucleic acid amplification techniques (NAATs) in digital format using limiting dilution provide

181 FDA-cleared nucleic acid amplification test (NAAT) but were negative for stx1 and stx2 following nucl

182 ce of a new nucleic acid amplification test (NAAT) for Mycoplasma genitalium, B.

183 ription-PCR nucleic acid amplification test (NAAT) for SARS-CoV-2 RNA.

184 assay is a nucleic acid amplification test (NAAT) for the detection of Mycobacterium tuberculosis co

185 diagnostic nucleic acid amplification test (NAAT) for the detection of Mycoplasma genitalium Seven u

186 rmance of a nucleic acid amplification test (NAAT) for the diagnosis of Mycobacterium tuberculosis ba

187 re positive nucleic acid amplification test (NAAT) results, or a single NAAT-positive result confirme

188 ])-positive nucleic acid amplification test (NAAT) results: (i) repeating the original test on the or

189 . difficile nucleic acid amplification test (NAAT) were enrolled.

190 lture and a nucleic acid amplification test (NAAT) were used to detect T. vaginalis.

191 a positive nucleic acid amplification test (NAAT), per US guidelines, and received CDI treatment.

192 only 3 of 8 nucleic acid amplification test (NAAT)-based studies (P = .03).

193 eening, all nucleic acid amplification test (NAAT)-positive respiratory specimens should be universal

194 ed with the nucleic acid amplification test (NAAT; BD MAX Cdiff assay or Xpert C. difficile assay) an

195 test, and a nucleic acid amplification test [NAAT]) were performed on vaginal swabs.

196 n of BKV nucleic acid amplification testing (NAAT) and enabling comparisons of biological measurement

197 positive nucleic acid amplification testing (NAAT) and received CDI treatment.

198 ecessary nucleic acid amplification testing (NAAT) for viral pathogens in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) s

199 Nucleic acid amplification testing (NAAT) has become the preferred method to detect Chlamydi

200 Nucleic acid amplification testing (NAAT) is increasingly being adopted for diagnosis of Clo

201 Nucleic acid amplification testing (NAAT) is the preferred method to detect Chlamydia tracho

202 cost of nucleic acid amplification testing (NAAT) makes individual testing of at-risk individuals pr

203 ults per nucleic acid amplification testing (NAAT) of viral samples retrieved with nasopharyngeal swa

204 ested by nucleic acid amplification testing (NAAT) to identify acute infections.

205 ture and nucleic acid amplification testing (NAAT) were completed weekly throughout the study.

206 However, nucleic acid amplification testing (NAAT) with the Xpert MTB/RIF assay (Xpert) may be more e

207 tions by nucleic acid amplification testing (NAAT), as they involve a less invasive collection method

208 (HIV-1) nucleic acid amplification testing (NAAT).

209 pared to nucleic acid amplification testing (NAAT).

210 ation of nucleic acid amplification testing (NAAT; Gen-Probe Aptima Combo 2 assay) for detection of C

211 [TC] and nucleic acid amplification testing [NAAT]) are confounded by asymptomatic colonization by to

212 doption of nucleic acid amplification tests (NAAT) for Clostridium difficile diagnosis and their impa

213 T) and HIV nucleic acid amplification tests (NAAT).

214 cimens for nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) and completed weekly sexual exposure diaries.

215 Commercial nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) are becoming available, and their use in screenin

216 Nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) are common in laboratory and clinical settings be

217 Nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) are expensive.

218 bacterium, nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) are necessary for its detection in patient specim

219 Nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) are quickly becoming the standard of care.

220 Nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) are reliable tools for the detection of toxigenic

221 Nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) are the primary means of identifying acute infect

222 itivity of nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) as compared with other test types.

223 s (EIA) to nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) as the primary diagnostic test for Clostridium di

224 Because nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) do not distinguish Clostridium difficile infectio

225 g positive nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) for Chlamydia trachomatis: (i) repeat the origina

226 ude use of nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) for detection of Trichomonas vaginalis by vaginal

227 d value of nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) for detection of TV in men and women at high risk

228 lification nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) for diagnosis of BV, VVC, and trichomoniasis.

229 Nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) for enterovirus RNA in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF)

230 available nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) for influenza virus detection.

231 ization of nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) for near-patient applications is not the amplific

232 ulture and nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) for rectal chlamydial and gonococcal diagnosis.

233 multiplex nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) for respiratory viruses should be repeated is dif

234 A-approved nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) for the detection or confirmation of HIV-2 infect

235 The use of nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) for the diagnosis of Clostridium (Clostridioides)

236 se of some nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) for the diagnosis of group A Streptococcus (GAS)

237 ulture and nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) for the diagnosis of pharyngeal N. gonorrhoeae.

238 available nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) for trichomoniasis are accurate, quick and confir

239 automated nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) has greatly improved the assay sensitivity and sp

240 ocessed by nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) has significantly increased the utilization of no

241 RNA-based nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) have demonstrated improved sensitivities compared

242 Nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) have frequently been the standard diagnostic appr

243 Nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) have revolutionized infectious disease diagnosis,

244 and rapid nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) in children and adults with suspected influenza.

245 st decade, nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) including polymerase chain reaction (PCR) were an

246 transforms nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) into phenotypic AST through quantitative detectio

247 etected by nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) only.

248 Nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) such as real-time PCR demonstrate excellent an li

249 o, CA) are nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) that detect Chlamydia trachomatis AC2 also detect

250 A)-cleared nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) to culture using 314 vaginal/rectal swabs after 1

251 The use of nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) to diagnose Neisseria gonorrhoeae infections comp

252 ificity of nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) used for early infant diagnosis (EID) of HIV infe

253 of malaria nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) using these specimen types.

254 ccus (GBS) nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) were compared to that of enriched culture for det

255 that time, nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) were just becoming commercially available, and th

256 onorrhoeae nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) with high sensitivity exist.

257 s of three nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs), the Hologic Panther Fusion GBS, Luminex Aries GB

258 A-approved nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs), the Panther Fusion and BD MAX systems, for detec

259 s, such as nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs), to evaluate prepubertal children for N. gonorrho

260 (IHC), and nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs).

261 o those of nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs).

262 variety of nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs).

263 Nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs)integrated on a chip hold great promise for point-

264 More toxin-positive than NAAT-positive-only cases were aged >=65 years (48.2% vs

265 e is a body of literature that suggests that NAATs lack clinical specificity and thus inflate CDI rat

266 The NAAT shows promise, but modifications should focus on im

267 otential false negatives in that cohort, the NAAT results of paired OS and NPS samples from 50 additi

268 The NAATs performed comparably and were more sensitive than

269 Because the NAATs can recognize and discriminate even a few copies o

270 Discordant results between the NAATs were reevaluated using the Aptima CT or Aptima GC

271 Discordant results between the NAATs were repeated using the assays APTIMA CT or APTIMA

272 Specificities of the NAATs ranged from 95.6% to 98.5% (two-of-three standard)

273 Agreement of the NAATs with each other was high (97.1% to 98.4%), but cul

274 pecimens were tested simultaneously with the NAATs, following 18 to 24 h of Lim broth enrichment; 15%

275 All three NAATs were more sensitive (sensitivity, 90.9 to 100%) th

276 culture and greater than 95.5% for all three NAATs.

277 omatis and N. gonorrhoeae by using all three NAATs.

278 nefits of extant laboratory-based, real-time NAATs to the point of care.

279 l transcription-mediated amplification (TMA) NAAT for the detection of M. genitalium 16S rRNA.

280 o changing from toxin enzyme immunoassays to NAAT.

281 scordant results, specimens were reflexed to NAAT) and classified as toxin positive or NAAT positive

282 Time to NAAT clearance of rectal and genital tract CT was simila

283 The Clarity assay was superior to NAATs for the diagnosis of CDI, by reducing overdiagnosi

284 Recent efforts to translate NAATs into at-home tests sacrifice one or more of the be

285 TV NAAT detected approximately one-third more infections am

286 ents (3821 women and 2514 men) received a TV NAAT on endocervical, urethral, or urine specimens.

287 ted Diseases (STD) Clinic and receiving a TV NAAT.

288 ive performance characteristics of these two NAATs were assessed with genital specimens from 284 wome

289 ve these reagents and release DNA in typical NAAT sample preparation methods.

290 as delineating recent advances in ultrafast NAAT applications.

291 irmatory testing remained cost-saving unless NAAT cost exceeded US$400 or the HIV-uninfected status o

292 Laboratories using NAAT had stricter rejection policies and increased posit

293 th complete surveys, 51 (43%) reported using NAAT in 2011.

294 trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae using NAATs and bacterial vaginosis using Gram stains.

295 During this study, 1.3% (n = 140) of viral NAAT studies yielded positive results.

296 %) were toxin positive and 2718 (55.7%) were NAAT positive only.

297 ntial clinical utility for identifying which NAAT- and toxin-positive patients with diarrhea truly ha

298 The overall rates of agreement with NAAT results for the individual 16S rRNA and cryptic pla

299 nrolled men who have sex with men (MSM) with NAAT-diagnosed pharyngeal gonorrhea in a single-arm, unb

300 ostatistical models of specimen pooling with NAAT for the identification of AHI cases; these models i