News, Analysis, Trends, Management Innovations for
Clinical Laboratories and Pathology Groups

Hosted by Robert Michel

News, Analysis, Trends, Management Innovations for
Clinical Laboratories and Pathology Groups

Hosted by Robert Michel
Sign In

10-Minute Blood Test Uses Digital Images and AI to Determine Sepsis Risk for Emergency Room Patients

With FDA clearance already approved, hospital infection control teams and their clinical laboratories may have another diagnostic tool for diagnosing blood infections

Controlling sepsis in hospitals continues to be a major concern in nations around the world, including in the United States. Now, a new 10-minute clinical laboratory blood test that uses artificial intelligence (AI) and digital images to spot biomarkers of the potentially fatal condition may soon be available for use in hospitals. The test, which was approved to be marketed in the US in 2022 by the federal Food and Drug Administration (FDA), may be “one of the most important breakthroughs in modern medical history,” according to US researchers, Good News Network (GNN) reported.

Called IntelliSep, the test was created through a partnership between San Francisco-based medical diagnostics company Cytovale and the Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center (LSUHSC) in Baton Rouge. Hollis O’Neal, MD, Critical Care Physician at LSUHSC and Medical Director of Research at Our Lady of the Lake Regional Medical Center, was the national principal investigator that resulted in the novel test being cleared by the FDA.

“Early detection of sepsis is an invaluable capability for healthcare professionals. Quickly identifying sepsis is critical to saving lives, but until now, we’ve lacked a reliable tool to either recognize the condition or explore alternate diagnoses,” said O’Neal in an LSU press release.

“IntelliSep is truly a game changer,” said Hollis O’Neal, MD (above), Associate Professor of Medicine at Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center in Baton Rouge. “The test provides hospital staff with information needed to identify and treat septic patients efficiently and reduce the financial and health burdens of overtreatment for hospitals and patients.” Clinical laboratories may have a new blood test for sepsis by the end of the year. (Photo copyright: Louisiana State University.)

How IntelliSep Works

The IntelliSep test analyzes blood samples extracted from emergency room patients who present with sepsis symptoms by squeezing white blood cells through a tiny tube to determine how the cells react and if they change shape. White blood cells in patients with sepsis are softer and spongier and their shape compresses and elongates, increasing the likelihood of developing sepsis.

Images are taken of the cells using an ultra-high-speed camera that can capture up to 500,000 frames per second. The images are the analyzed by an AI-powered computer which calculates the total number of elongated white blood cells to determine if sepsis is present.

IntelliSep then separates patients into three bands of risk for developing sepsis:

  • Band 1 (low)
  • Band 2 (medium)
  • Band 3 (high)

Results of the test are available to emergency room personnel in less than 10 minutes.

“Sepsis is notorious as the ‘silent killer’ because it is so easily missed early on, when a patient’s symptoms can often be mistaken for other less serious illnesses,” Michael Atar, PhD, DDS, Associate Professor, Pediatric Dentistry at New York University told Good News Network. “Rapid diagnosis and treatment is crucial to a good outcome, but there has never been a single, reliable diagnostic test available to doctors, costing precious time and people’s lives.”

Atar is a lead medical technology investor and an advisor to Cytovale. 

‘Holy Grail’ of Sepsis Diagnosis

To complete the IntelliSep study, researchers enrolled 1,002 ER patients who presented with signs of sepsis. IntelliSep correctly identified patients who did not have sepsis with an accuracy rate of 97.5%. The technology showed an accuracy rate of 55% for positive sepsis results. Researchers also used IntelliSep to quickly diagnose and assess the severity of a sepsis infection.  

There were no sepsis deaths reported in patients with low-risk scores. This indicates the test could help physicians rule out sepsis and seek other diagnoses for those patients.

“Cytovale’s IntelliSep device is, by any objective measure, the ‘holy grail’ that the medical community has been so desperate to find,” Atar told Good News Network. “The technology behind it is genuinely groundbreaking and it has the real-world, tried-and-tested potential to save millions of lives, year on year, across the planet.”

The technology is currently being used in a few hospitals in Louisiana and the inventors hope to have it available in at least 10 other hospitals by the end of the year.

Our Lady of the Lake Regional Medical Center, a not-for-profit Catholic healthcare ministry located in Baton Rouge, was one of the first hospitals to implement IntelliSep.

“Cytovale’s innovative technology will help drastically decrease the number of sepsis-related deaths in hospital settings, and we are honored that, since day one, we have been a part of the research that led to this technology,” said Chuck Spicer, President of Our Lady of the Lake Health in a news release.

Saint Francis Medical Center in Monroe, La., announced on September 3 that it has started using the IntelliSep test in its emergency rooms and staff are impressed by the impact on hospital efficiency. 

“If it turns out negative then you don’t have to treat as many patients as you did before, which runs up costs, hospital bills and causes people to be in the hospital for longer periods of time,” said pulmonary disease physician Thomas Gullatt, MD, President, St. Francis Health, told KNOE News.

Patient Expectations for Treatment

Sepsis, also known as septicemia or blood poisoning, is a serious medical condition that occurs when the body improperly reacts to an infection or injury. The dangerous reaction causes extensive inflammation throughout the body and, if not treated early, can lead to organ failure, tissue damage, and even death. 

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reports at least 1.7 million adults develop sepsis annually in the US and at least 350,000 die as a result of the condition. It also states sepsis is one of the main reasons people are readmitted to hospitals.

Clinical laboratories should be aware of developments in the use of this new diagnostic assay and how it is aiding the diagnosis, antibiotic selection, and monitoring of patients with this deadly infection. Patients often learn about new technologies and come to their hospital or provider expecting to be treated with these innovations.

—JP Schlingman

Related Information:

Blood Test That Detects Sepsis in 10 Minutes by Squeezing Blood Cells—Hailed as ‘The Holy Grail’

St. Francis Medical Center Introduces Life-saving Sepsis Test

Ask a Specialist: Sepsis

Cytovale’s Sepsis Diagnostic Test Demonstrates 97.5% NPV in Latest Study

LSU Health Sciences Physician Lead Investigator on Groundbreaking Sepsis Test

FDA Clears Cytovale’s IntelliSep Sepsis Test, First in a New Class of Emergency Department-Focused Diagnostic Tools

New Test for Sepsis Could Save Lives in Emergency Departments, Study Suggests

Cytovale’s Rapid Sepsis Diagnostic Test Demonstrates Improved Patient Care and Cost Savings in Hospital Application

Cleveland Clinic: Sepsis

WHO: Sepsis

National Institute of General Medical Sciences: Sepsis

Sepsis Is the Third Leading Cause of Death in U.S. hospitals. But Quick Action Can Save Lives

Cellular Host Response Sepsis Test for Risk Stratification of Patients in the Emergency Department: A Pooled Analysis

FDA Grants Marketing Authorization to First Ever AI-Powered SaMD Diagnostic Tool for Sepsis That Shares Patient’s Risk within 24 Hours and Works with EHRs

How Real-Time Analytics Improved Lab Performance and Helped Reduce Readmissions Due to Fewer False Positives in Sepsis Testing

New Federal Rules on Sepsis Treatment Could Cost Hospitals Millions of Dollars in Medicare Reimbursements

Abbott Lab’s ID NOW COVID-19 Rapid Molecular Test Continues to Face Scrutiny over ‘False Negatives’

Though the test initially drew ‘raves’ from Trump administration, the FDA now suggests negative results should be confirmed with an additional ‘high-sensitivity authorized SARS-CoV-2 molecular test’

This spring, as the United States attempted to jump-start a national response to the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus pandemic, the Trump administration heralded Abbott Laboratories’ five-minute test for COVID-19 as a major breakthrough. But even as the federal Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued dozens of Emergency Use Authorizations (EUAs) to quickly get COVID-19 diagnostic tests into clinical use, the accuracy of some of those tests came into question—including Abbott’s ID NOW COVID-19 rapid molecular test.

The continuing controversy over Abbott’s ID NOW COVID-19 test shows how the national spotlight can be a double-edged sword, bringing both widespread favorable attention to a breakthrough technology, followed by heightened public scrutiny if deficiencies emerge. At the same time, from the first news stories about the Abbott ID NOW COVID-19 test, pathologists and clinical laboratory managers understood that this test always had certain performance parameters, as is true of every diagnostic test.

“Everybody was raving about it,” a former administration official, speaking on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal deliberations, said of ID NOW in an interview with Kaiser Health News (KHN). “It’s an amazing test, but it has limitations which are now being better understood.”

President Trump touts Abbott’s ID-NOW COVID-19 rapid molecular test kit
In a White House ceremony on March 29, 2020, President Trump praised his administration’s role in speeding up development “on both testing and treatment that will help us win our war against the coronavirus.” Among the moves highlighted was the FDA’s approval two days earlier of Abbott’s ID-NOW COVID-19 rapid molecular test (above), which the President stated, “delivers lightning-fast results in as little as five minutes,” adding, “Normally, this approval process from the FDA would take 10 months, and even longer, but we did it in four weeks.” (Photo copyright: Washington Post.)

FDA Warns Public about Inaccurate Test Results

On May 14, the FDA issued a public warning about the point-of-care test’s accuracy after receiving 15 “adverse event reports” indicating some patients were receiving “false negative results.”

The FDA’s public alert followed a New York University (NYU) study, published in the Journal of Clinical Microbiology, titled, “Performance of Abbott ID Now COVID-19 Rapid Nucleic Acid Amplification Test Using Nasopharyngeal Swabs Transported in Viral Transport Media and Dry Nasal Swabs in a New York City Academic Institution,” which compared Abbott’s ID NOW COVID-19 test results to those from the Cepheid Xpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2 rapid near-patient test, which NYU had already been using in its laboratory.

“Regardless of method of collection and sample type, Abbott ID NOW COVID-19 had negative results in a third of the samples that tested positive by Cepheid Xpert Xpress when using nasopharyngeal swabs in viral transport media and 45% when using dry nasal swabs,” the NYU study authors stated.

Abbott Rebuts Criticism

In a statement following the FDA’s warning, Abbott said, “We’re seeing studies being conducted to understand the role of ID NOW in ways that it was not designed to be used. In particular, the NYU study results are not consistent with other studies. While we’ve seen a few studies with sensitivity performance percentages in the 80s, we’ve also seen other studies with sensitivity at or above 90%, and one as high as 94%.

“While we understand no test is perfect, test outcomes depend on a number of factors including patient selection, specimen type, collection, handling, storage, transport and conformity to the way the test was designed to be run. ID NOW is intended to be used near the patient with a direct swab test method,” Abbott’s statement added, noting the company would be “further clarifying our product information to provide better guidance” and “reinforcing proper sample collection and handling instructions.”

Then, on May 21, Abbott issued another statement highlighting an interim analysis of an ongoing multisite clinical study demonstrating ID NOW COVID-19 test performance is ≥94.7% in positive agreement (sensitivity) and ≥98.6% negative agreement (specificity) when compared to two different lab-based molecular PCR reference methods.

“We’re pleased ID NOW is delivering on what it was designed to do—quickly detect the virus in people who need to know now if they’re infected,” said Philip Ginsburg, MD, SAIM, Senior Medical Director, Infectious Disease, Rapid Diagnostics at Abbott, in the statement. “This is great news for people who are experiencing symptoms and want to take action before they infect others, reducing the spread of infection in society.”

Nonetheless, KHN reported on June 22 that the FDA had “received a total of 106 reports of adverse events for the Abbott test, a staggering increase. The agency has not received a single adverse event report for any other point-of-care tests meant to diagnose COVID-19.”

Second Comparison Study Results for Abbott’s ID NOW

Susan Whittier, PhD, Director of Clinical Microbiology at New York-Presbyterian/Columbia University Medical Center, co-authored a study, published in Science Direct, titled, “ Comparison of Cepheid Xpert Xpress and Abbott ID NOW to Roche cobas for the Rapid Detection of SARS-CoV-2,” which compared Abbott ID NOW and rival Cepheid Xpert Xpress SARS CoV-2 to the Roche cobas SARS-CoV-2 assay for samples with low, medium, and high viral concentrations.

The Abbott ID NOW test correctly identified 74% of positive samples. In comparison, Cepheid’s Xpert Xpress SARS CoV-2 test correctly identified 99% of positives. Negative agreement was 100% and 92.0% for ID NOW and Xpert, respectively.

The FDA’s testing policy for clinical laboratories and commercial manufacturers recommends diagnostic tests correctly identify at least 95% of positive samples. However, KHN pointed out, a senior FDA official in late May said coronavirus tests that were administered outside lab settings would be considered useful in fighting the pandemic even if they miss 20% of positive cases.

“There’s no way I would be comfortable missing two out of 10 patients,” Whittier told KHN.

Abbott ID-NOW’s Role in the Global Fight to Stop COVID-19

However, in the FDA’s initial public warning, Tim Stenzel, MD, PhD, Director of the Office of In Vitro Diagnostics and Radiological Health, part of the FDA’s Center for Devices and Radiological Health, said, “This test can still be used and can correctly identify many positive cases in minutes. Negative results may need to be confirmed with a high-sensitivity authorized molecular test.”

Abbott’s ID NOW COVID-19 test is promoted as delivering positive test results in five minutes and negative results in about 13 minutes. On its website and in news releases, Abbott maintains its test “performs best in patients tested earlier post symptom onset.”

In a July 17 statement, Abbott said, “ We have shipped 5.3 million of our rapid ID NOW tests to all 50 states, Washington DC, Puerto Rico and the Pacific Islands. The majority of these tests have been sent to outbreak hotspots and we’ve asked that customers prioritize frontline healthcare workers and first responders.”

It is common for a new diagnostic instrument and a new clinical laboratory test to be continually improved after initial launch. Thus, the performance of such devices at the time they are given clearance from the FDA to be used in clinical care can be much improved several months or years later.

Given the importance of a reliable point-of-care SARS-CoV-2 test during the pandemic, it can be assumed that Abbott Laboratories is working closely with its medical laboratory customers specifically to improve the accuracy, reliability, and reproducibility of both the instrument and the test kit.

—Andrea Downing Peck

Related Information:

As Problems Grow with Abbott’s Fast COVID Test, FDA Standards under Fire

Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Emergency Use Authorizations for Medical Devices

Comparison of Cepheid Xpert Xpress and Abbott ID Now to Roche Cobas for the Rapid Detection of SARS-CoV-2

Policy for Coronavirus Disease-2019 Tests During the Public Health Emergency

Remarks by President Trump, Vice President Pence, and Members of the Coronavirus Task Force in Press Briefing

FDA Informs Public About Possible Accuracy Concerns with Abbott ID Now Point-of-Care Test

Performance of Abbott ID NOW COVID-19 Rapid Nucleic Acid Amplification Test in Nasopharyngeal Swabs Transported in Viral Media and Dry Nasal Swabs, in a New York City Academic Institution

Abbott Provides Update on ID NOW

Abbott Releases Interim Clinical Study Data on ID NOW COVID-19 Rapid Test Showing Strong Agreement to Lab-based Molecular PCR Tests

FDA Cautions about Accuracy of Widely Used Abbott Coronavirus Test

An Update on Abbott’s Work on COVID-19 Testing

The Scientist’s Top 10 Scientific Innovations for 2014 Offer Powerful New Research Tools to Advance Diagnostics and Possibly Find Uses in Clinical Laboratories

Many of these new technologies could help pathologists develop new diagnostic tests and offer medical laboratories opportunities to expand their services

Pathologists and clinical laboratory scientists tracking the hottest new diagnostic technologies may be in interested in the 2014 list of “Top Ten Innovations” recently published by The Scientist.

This is a competition and each year The Scientist has a panel of five experts in life sciences review the entries. Among this year’s Top Ten Innovations are promising diagnostic tools and new technologies with the potential to disrupt the current state of healthcare. In the near future, most of these technologies will be used by researchers to better understand the underlying, genetic cause of diseases and advance new treatments. However, some of these innovative technologies have already been adopted for clinical use. Others are probably several years away from becoming the basis for new medical laboratory tests.

Here is a short overview of The Scientist magazine’s list of “Top Ten Innovations for 2014.” (more…)

Microbiologists at Weill Cornell Use Next-Generation Gene Sequencing to Map the Microbiome of New York City Subways

Pathologists and clinical laboratory managers can expect environmental microbiome detection and monitoring to play an increasingly important role in disease diagnosis, treatment and prevention

For decades, microbiologists and clinical laboratory professionals have prowled the corridors of hospitals to swab physicians’ neckties, the hands of nurses and staff, and various surfaces. These swabs were then cultured to demonstrate how easily infectious microbes can be transmitted in everyday activities.

Now researchers, including microbiologists, are combing the New York City subway system to swab surfaces, collect specimens, and create a map of the urban microbiome. Researchers at Weill Cornell Medical College in New York City want to use the microbiome to pioneer a new method for city-level pathogen monitoring. (more…)

New York Genome Center Opens New Gene Sequencing and Bioinformatics Facility in Downtown Manhattan

The Center brings together scientists from around the city to translate promising research into medical innovations to treat, prevent and manage disease

Gene sequencing is going big time in the Big Apple. Last month the New York Genome Center (NYGC) moved into a state-of-the-art, 170,000-square-foot genome sequencing and biometrics research building. New York City is putting down its marker to claim a leading role in advancing genetic knowledge.

What makes this development notable for the clinical laboratory industry and the anatomic pathology profession is the fact that cities across the nation are investing substantial amounts of capital to create their own genetic and biotech research and development hubs. Their common objective is to bring together all the expertise, financial support, and business acumen needed to create a job-creating critical mass in the fields of biotech and genetic medicine. (more…)

;