Ruiz Guillermo, Peña Pilar, de Ory Fernando, Echevarría Juan Emilio
National Microbiology Center, Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Ctra. Majadahonda-Pozuelo s/n, 28220 Majadahonda, Madrid, Spain.
J Clin Microbiol. 2005 May;43(5):2053-7. doi: 10.1128/JCM.43.5.2053-2057.2005.
Clinical research suggests a role for viral load measurement in predicting and monitoring Epstein-Barr virus (EBV)-associated diseases. The aim of this study was to assess the performance of the recently commercially available quantitative assays for EBV based on real-time PCR: the RealArt EBV LC PCR kit and the LightCycler EBV quantification kit. A total of 87 samples were analyzed: 67 samples were obtained from transplant recipients and patients with EBV-associated diseases, 8 samples were obtained from the Quality Control for Molecular Diagnostics 2002 EBV Proficiency Program, and 12 negative qualitative nested PCR samples were used as negative controls. Inter- and intra-assay variabilities were determined by running replicates of two samples. All samples were run in a LightCycler instrument. The differences between positive and negative results were not considered statistically significant (P = 0.5355). There were no false-positive results using either method for nested PCR negative-control samples. The difference in viral load values using the two different methods was considered statistically significant (P < 0.01). The logarithmic linear correlation for both assays was low (r = 0.449) but significant (P < 0.01). The LightCycler EBV quantification kit showed a wider dispersal in results but produced substantially more-accurate melting temperature profile curves. The bias towards lower measurements was considerable in comparison with higher viral load. The differences in PCR efficiency and the presence of mutations could explain the disparity between the two methods. It was concluded that confidence intervals would be required to report the results rather than plain absolute values of viral load for patient monitoring.
临床研究表明,病毒载量检测在预测和监测爱泼斯坦-巴尔病毒(EBV)相关疾病中发挥着作用。本研究的目的是评估最近市售的基于实时PCR的EBV定量检测方法的性能:RealArt EBV LC PCR试剂盒和LightCycler EBV定量试剂盒。共分析了87个样本:67个样本来自移植受者和EBV相关疾病患者,8个样本来自2002年分子诊断质量控制EBV能力验证计划,12个阴性定性巢式PCR样本用作阴性对照。通过对两个样本进行重复检测来确定批间和批内变异性。所有样本均在LightCycler仪器中运行。阳性和阴性结果之间的差异无统计学意义(P = 0.5355)。对于巢式PCR阴性对照样本,两种方法均未出现假阳性结果。两种不同方法测得的病毒载量值差异具有统计学意义(P < 0.01)。两种检测方法的对数线性相关性较低(r = 0.449),但具有统计学意义(P < 0.01)。LightCycler EBV定量试剂盒的结果离散度更大,但熔解温度曲线更准确。与高病毒载量相比,低测量值的偏差相当大。PCR效率的差异和突变的存在可以解释两种方法之间的差异。得出的结论是,报告结果时需要置信区间,而不是用于患者监测的病毒载量的简单绝对值。