Back

High Norovirus False Discovery Rates and Noro-1 Assay Cross-Reactivity in the BioFire FilmArray Gastrointestinal Panel

Mauer, C.; Reed, J. C.; Mack, A. R.; Theriault, E. A.; Tansarli, G. S.; Fang, F. C.; Bourassa, L.; Greninger, A. L.

2026-05-20 infectious diseases
10.64898/2026.05.15.26353342 medRxiv
Show abstract

Molecular syndromic panels such as the BioFire FilmArray Gastrointestinal Panel (BF-GIP) have been widely adopted for gastrointestinal illness diagnosis due to their fast turnaround times and broad pathogen coverage. Recently, the BF-GIP demonstrated increased rates of norovirus false-positive detections, prompting a Class II recall of more than two million tests in February 2024. We examined the prevalence of BF-GIP norovirus false positives across four hospitals from December 2024 to June 2025. Among 185 BF-GIP norovirus-positive results confirmed with the BD MAX Enteric Viral Panel, the false discovery rate ranged from 31 to 74% across sites, with the highest rate seen at a specialized cancer care hospital. Deep sequencing of BF-GIP pouches (n=42) confirmed the Noro-1 assay as the primary source of off-target amplification, identifying 78 off-target species, predominantly commensal stool bacteria, compared to only two species for the Noro-2 assay. Off-target species amplified by the Noro-1 assay were recovered from both false-positive and true-negative pouches, suggesting no single species accounted for the false-positive results. Partial primer complementarity at off-target loci and amplicon Tm values within the acceptable range support mispriming of gut microbiota as the underlying cause. False-positive pouches exhibited significantly higher Cp values than true positives for both assays (Noro-1: 26.6 vs. 11.1, p=0.013; Noro-2: 30.0 vs. 13.1, p<0.001), consistent with low-level off-target amplification. These findings highlight the high false discovery rate of the Noro-1 assay, identify bacterial species involved in mispriming, and demonstrate the need to redesign this assay to ensure reliable testing and improved patient care.

Matching journals

The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Journal of Clinical Microbiology
120 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
36.3%
2
Med
38 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
7.2%
3
Microbiology Spectrum
435 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
6.3%
4
The Journal of Molecular Diagnostics
36 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.7%
50% of probability mass above
5
Clinical Chemistry
22 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
2.6%
6
The Lancet Microbe
43 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
2.4%
7
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 46%
2.4%
8
Emerging Infectious Diseases
103 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
2.4%
9
mSphere
281 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.1%
10
Clinical Infectious Diseases
231 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.1%
11
Journal of Clinical Virology
62 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.9%
12
Gastroenterology
40 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
1.9%
13
Cell Reports Medicine
140 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.9%
14
Journal of Infection
71 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.7%
15
Open Forum Infectious Diseases
134 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.7%
16
Nature Medicine
117 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.7%
17
The Journal of Infectious Diseases
182 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.5%
18
Viruses
318 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.5%
19
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 63%
1.3%
20
Genome Medicine
154 papers in training set
Top 6%
1.2%
21
Journal of Medical Virology
137 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.2%
22
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 65%
0.8%
23
Microbial Genomics
204 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.8%
24
Nature Biomedical Engineering
42 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.7%
25
JCI Insight
241 papers in training set
Top 7%
0.7%
26
Nature Biotechnology
147 papers in training set
Top 8%
0.7%
27
Journal of Medical Microbiology
20 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
0.7%
28
BMC Infectious Diseases
118 papers in training set
Top 6%
0.7%
29
Gut Microbes
70 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.6%