Suppr超能文献

比较四种商业化 EBV DNA 定量检测方法与一种处于早期开发阶段的新检测方法。

Comparison of four commercial EBV DNA quantitative tests to a new test at an early stage of development.

机构信息

Research Unit Molecular Diagnostics, Diagnostic and Research Center for Molecular Biomedicine, Medical University of Graz, Graz, 8010, Austria.

Research Unit Molecular Diagnostics, Diagnostic and Research Center for Molecular Biomedicine, Medical University of Graz, Graz, 8010, Austria.

出版信息

J Clin Virol. 2023 Apr;161:105400. doi: 10.1016/j.jcv.2023.105400. Epub 2023 Feb 11.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Regular screening for Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) DNA using quantitative RT-PCR is recommended for early intervention in at-risk patients. Harmonization of quantitative RT-PCR assays is critical to avoid misinterpretation of results. Here, we compare quantitative results of the cobas® EBV assay to four commercial RT-qPCR assays.

METHODS

The cobas EBV, EBV R-Gene, artus EBV RG PCR, RealStar EBV PCR kit 2.0 and Abbott EBV RealTime assays were compared for analytic performance using a 10-fold dilution series of EBV reference material, normalized to the WHO standard. For clinical performance, their quantitative results were compared using anonymized, leftover EBV-DNA-positive EDTA plasma samples.

RESULTS

For analytic accuracy, the cobas EBV deviated -0.0097 log from target values. The other tests showed deviations between 0.0037 and -0.12 log. For clinical performance, accuracy and linearity of cobas EBV data from both study sites were excellent. Bland-Altman bias and Deming regression analyses showed statistical correlation for cobas EBV to both EBV R-Gene and Abbott RealTime assays but an offset of cobas EBV to artus EBV RG PCR and RealStar EBV PCR kit 2.0.

CONCLUSION

The cobas EBV showed the closest correlation to the reference material, followed closely by EBV R-Gene and Abbott EBV RealTime. Values obtained are stated in IU/mL, facilitating comparison across testing sites and potentially improving utilization of guidelines for diagnosis, monitoring, and treatment of patients.

摘要

背景

推荐使用定量 RT-PCR 定期筛查 Epstein-Barr 病毒 (EBV) DNA,以便对高危患者进行早期干预。定量 RT-PCR 检测的协调一致对于避免结果的误读至关重要。在此,我们比较了 cobas® EBV 检测与四种商业 RT-qPCR 检测的定量结果。

方法

使用 EBV 参考材料的 10 倍稀释系列,归一化为世界卫生组织标准,比较了 cobas EBV、EBV R-Gene、artus EBV RG PCR、RealStar EBV PCR 试剂盒 2.0 和 Abbott EBV RealTime 检测的分析性能。为了评估临床性能,使用匿名的、剩余的 EBV-DNA 阳性 EDTA 血浆样本比较了它们的定量结果。

结果

在分析准确性方面,cobas EBV 与目标值的偏差为-0.0097 log。其他检测的偏差在 0.0037 到-0.12 log 之间。对于临床性能,两个研究地点的 cobas EBV 数据的准确性和线性都非常出色。Bland-Altman 偏差和 Deming 回归分析显示,cobas EBV 与 EBV R-Gene 和 Abbott RealTime 检测具有统计学相关性,但与 artus EBV RG PCR 和 RealStar EBV PCR 试剂盒 2.0 存在偏差。

结论

cobas EBV 与参考材料的相关性最密切,紧随其后的是 EBV R-Gene 和 Abbott EBV RealTime。所得值以 IU/mL 表示,便于在不同检测地点进行比较,并有可能改善诊断、监测和治疗患者的指南的利用。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验