Molecular Infectious Disease Testing 2017-03-01T20:01:09+00:00


4path is proud to announce that it now is providing rapid FDA approved Molecular Infectious Disease testing for our clients. These FDA approved tests provide rapid results utilizing RT-PCR molecular based testing procedures, ensuring a high degree of specificity and sensitivity.

We offer:

Resp-20, a FDA approved rt-PCR based infectious disease panel for 20 of the most common upper respiratory viral and bacterial pathogens.

GI-22, a FDA approved rt-PCR based infectious disease panel for 22 of the most common GI viral, bacterial and protozoan pathogens.

Please click on the appropriate panel to take you to full test descriptions, performance characteristics and other important information

Each individually packaged collection kit contains the materials necessary to collect the patient specimen, including full packaging and, where applicable, FedEx pre-paid mailer.

Contact 4path today at 1-877-884-7284 to start offering this important diagnostic aid to your practice.

Interested in learning more about the clinical use of the GI pathogen panel in your practice?  Listen to this recent webinar.

How Syndromic Testing Can Improve Patient Care

The Impact of the Gastrointestinal Panel (Webinar)

Interested in REAL TIME comparative data from other sites using our same detection technology?

Click HERE to see current data aggregated, by viral type, from multiple locations in the country, which is using the same technology that 4path uses for it’s Resp-20 analysis. (Click map also for link…please note..the map is an image and a link to the actual site.)

At 4path, this year we have detected the following viral agents in the western suburbs of Chicago:

  • Influenza B
  • Influenza A
  • Parainfluenza 3
  • Adenovirus
  • Metapneumovirus
  • Respiratory Syncytial Virus
  • Rhinovirus/Enterovirus
  • Coronavirus 0143
  • Coronavirus 229E

While the majority of the infections have been single viruss, multi-viral illnesses with two or three different viral agents have been seen in this population.

Do you REALLY know what your patient has? 

CDC Weekly Influenza Incidence Map

Click here to view the CDC map of the current incidences of influenza in the US.

What You Should Know for the Annual Influenza Seasons

Link to current information at the CDE regarding the flu season for 2016-2017

Link to current information at the CDC regarding the flu season for 2015-2016

 4path’s Resp-20 Upper Respiratory Profile

There is substantial cost to the medical system for upper respiratory infectious diseases, not to forget the impact on the individual patient, with significant morbidity, and in some cases potential mortality.

Every year between 5-20% of the US population contracts influenza, with a cost to the health care system between $71 and $167 BILLION dollars. In addition, other viruses such as Adenovirus, metapneumovirus, parainfluenza RSV and other bacterial diseases also contribute to the morbidity and mortality to patient. Over one BILLION cases of rhinovirus are contracted annually.

Molecular diagnostics for respiratory diseases are quickly replacing the previous methods of diagnosing these disease because of specificity, sensitivity and speed of diagnosis (the three “S”s), allowing the treating physicians to more rapidly have a definitive diagnosis that they can initiate treatment, or in some cases withhold inappropriate treatment.

The common anti-viral medications are most effective if administered within 48 hours of the onset of symptoms. With rapid PCR based molecular diagnostics, a definitive diagnosis can be established and reported within that time frame. This is not usually possible with older methods of diagnostics.

This improvement has been reported to reduce time to identification; reduce duration of antibiotic use and reduce the length of stay for in-patient cases and reduction of time patients are in isolation.

These benefits certainly outweigh the modest increase in cost for molecular diagnostics over conventional laboratory diagnostics.

 4path’s GI-22 Infectious Diarrhea Profile

Infectious enteritis and foodborne infectious disease result in more the 300,000 emergency room visits annually, with an associated 225,000 inpatient admissions. The total cost of this? $1.8 BILLION dollars annually.

Unfortunately current “standard” diagnostics often don’t provide a definitive diagnosis in over 80% of cases. The majority of foodborne infectious disease is due to norovirus, however many laboratories are not equipped to make this diagnosis in a timely fashion…or at all.

Treatment decisions for infectious diarrhea often can change based on the infectious agent identified. For that reason, sensitive, specific and speedy (three “S”s) diagnoses are essential. Only molecular diagnostic methods can provide these benefits, allowing them to rapidly and specifically divide patients into the following categories:

  • No infection
  • Self limited diseases
  • Virulent infections

Having this information can help treat patients more specifically and quickly resulting in:

  • More specific treatment for the specific diagnosis
  • Elimination of the use of antibiotics where not indicated, eliminating the risk to the patient of antibiotic related side effects or complications
  • Appropriate triage of patients to proper health care settings based on the severity of the disease.
  • Reduction of cost for the patient and impact on the health care system
  • Better patient outcome and satisfaction

Not every “Molecular Test” is a responsible use of health care dollars.

Molecular diagnostics are usually more expensive than standard laboratory testing, but are fully justified when the impact on the patient warrants it. Times when they ARE indicated would include:

  • When the reduction in Turn-around-time is clinically significant to the patient
  • When the increase in sensitivity does not result in an increase in false-positive results
  • When the increase in specificity does not result in the missing of other clinically relevant diseases
  • When rapid, accurate and specific diagnosis actually makes a difference to the patient’s outcome.

Molecular diagnostics are probably NOT indicated in some settings, where they only add cost and no real benefit. This includes:

  • When the reduction in time does NOT add any significant benefit to the patient (Example: Fungal molecular diagnostics for cutaneous, nail, hair fungal infections.)
  • When current methodologies provide sufficient sensitivity, specificity and speed (Example: Urine cultures work very well)
  • When the very sensitive nature of the testing may result in false positive results (Example: When cutaneous or nail specimens may be contaminated by the environment, or even non-infectious contaminant DNA on re-usable instrument).

Yes, molecular diagnostics are an enormous benefit to patients and the health care. However, like any new technology, it must be used appropriately and not performed for financial gain when other laboratory methods provide equal or even better results.