Boutolleau D, L'Honneur A-S, Germi R, Chanzy B, Archimbaud-Jallat C, Rzadkowolski C, Raimbourg J B, Gauthier D, Thibault V
AP-HP. Pitié-Salpêtrière Hospital, Virology Department, National Reference Centre for Herpesviruses (Associated Laboratory), Sorbonne Université, Paris, France.
INSERM, Pierre Louis Institute of Epidemiology and Public Health (IPLESP), UMR_S1136, Sorbonne University, Paris, France.
J Clin Microbiol. 2025 Jul 9;63(7):e0191124. doi: 10.1128/jcm.01911-24. Epub 2025 Jun 5.
Cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection monitoring is a key element in the management of immunocompromised patients. CMV DNA quantification in plasma or whole blood is the best indicator for clinicians to adjust immunosuppressive or antiviral therapies. Despite the availability of internationally standardized material, the commutability of CMV quantification results across laboratories remains inadequate. To assess inter-laboratory variability in CMV DNA quantification, we conducted a blinded study in seven independent laboratories. Each participant received a panel of 92 specimens for CMV quantification using their routinely used standard platform. While quantifications were highly correlated and reproducible, large discrepancies were observed with differences up to 1.45 log IU/mL between techniques for identical specimens. However, quantification scattering was lower for the World Health Organization (WHO) international standard or a commercially tested control (interquartile range = 0.129) than for clinical specimens (0.469; = 0.0142). Blind quantification of the WHO or the commercial standard indicated that all techniques, except for fully integrated platforms, did not align well with the expected values, and most platforms tended to quantify specimens and standards differently. Recalibration of all platforms against the same standard improved the spread of results, but differences of up to 1.19 log IU/mL remained for the same specimens. Achieving commutability in CMV quantification remains an elusive goal. Efforts should focus on improving both the assay calibrators and the run controls, which currently do not appear to simulate the unique characteristics of circulating CMV in patients. Until this is resolved, each transplanted patient should be consistently monitored by the same laboratory on the same platform.IMPORTANCEOur conclusions support previous work on this topic describing the diversity of circulating cytomegalovirus (CMV) DNA forms and the difficulties in standardizing CMV viral load (VL) measurement. The inter-assay reproducibility of CMV VL measurement is primarily influenced by the extraction procedure and the amplicon size generated by the technique. Viral standards generated from cell culture supernatant do not reflect circulating CMV forms from patient samples. We highlight the need to develop a new international standard that better reflects the circulating forms of CMV and demonstrate the risk of tracking a patient's CMV VL in different laboratories.
巨细胞病毒(CMV)感染监测是免疫功能低下患者管理中的关键要素。血浆或全血中的CMV DNA定量是临床医生调整免疫抑制或抗病毒治疗的最佳指标。尽管有国际标准化材料,但各实验室之间CMV定量结果的互换性仍然不足。为了评估CMV DNA定量的实验室间变异性,我们在七个独立实验室进行了一项盲法研究。每位参与者使用其常规使用的标准平台接收一组92个用于CMV定量的标本。虽然定量结果高度相关且可重复,但对于相同标本,不同技术之间观察到了高达1.45 log IU/mL的巨大差异。然而,世界卫生组织(WHO)国际标准或商业测试对照的定量散射(四分位间距 = 0.129)低于临床标本(0.469;P = <0.0142)。对WHO标准或商业标准进行盲法定量表明,除了完全集成的平台外,所有技术与预期值的一致性都不好,并且大多数平台对标本和标准的定量方式不同。将所有平台重新校准至同一标准改善了结果的离散度,但相同标本之间仍存在高达1.19 log IU/mL的差异。在CMV定量中实现互换性仍然是一个难以实现的目标。应努力改进检测校准物和运行对照,目前它们似乎无法模拟患者循环中CMV的独特特征。在这个问题解决之前,每位移植患者应由同一实验室在同一平台上进行持续监测。
重要性
我们的结论支持此前关于该主题的研究工作,这些研究描述了循环巨细胞病毒(CMV)DNA形式的多样性以及标准化CMV病毒载量(VL)测量的困难。CMV VL测量的检测间重复性主要受提取程序和该技术产生的扩增子大小影响。从细胞培养上清液产生的病毒标准品不能反映患者样本中循环的CMV形式。我们强调需要制定一个能更好反映CMV循环形式的新国际标准,并证明在不同实验室跟踪患者CMV VL的风险。