一家三级癌症医院对 cobas Epstein-Barr 病毒检测的分析和临床评估

IF 4 3区 医学 Q2 VIROLOGY
Cindy Lee , Younmin Lim , Deborah Saintine , N.Esther Babady
{"title":"一家三级癌症医院对 cobas Epstein-Barr 病毒检测的分析和临床评估","authors":"Cindy Lee ,&nbsp;Younmin Lim ,&nbsp;Deborah Saintine ,&nbsp;N.Esther Babady","doi":"10.1016/j.jcv.2024.105680","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Epstein–Barr Virus (EBV) viral loads in hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) recipients are typically monitored using quantitative molecular assays. The Cobas EBV test (Roche Molecular, Pleasanton, CA) has recently been FDA-cleared for the monitoring of EBV viral loads in plasma samples of transplant patients. In this study, we compared the viral loads obtained by a laboratory-developed test (EBV LDT) using Altona Analyte specific reagents (ASR) to those obtained on the Cobas EBV test.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>The analytical performance of the assay was established using the EBV verification panel from Exact Diagnostics and the EBV ATCC strain B95-8. The clinical evaluation was performed using 343 plasma samples initially tested on the EBV LDT.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>The analytical sensitivity (&lt;18.8 IU/mL), precision (SD &lt; 0.17 log) and linear range (35.0 IU/mL to 1E + 08 IU/mL) of the Cobas EBV assay established by the manufacturers were confirmed. The strength of the qualitative agreement was substantial between the cobas EBV and the EBV LDT (85.6 %; <em>κ</em> = 0.71) and almost perfect when discordant results were resolved (96.4 %; <em>κ</em> = 0.93). The quantitative agreement was moderate (82.9 %; <em>κ</em> = 0.53) with the viral load obtained on the Cobas EBV test being lower across the linear range of the two tests (mean log difference of 1.0). While the absolute values of the viral loads were markedly different, the overall trends observed in patients with multiple consecutive results were similar between the two tests.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>The Cobas EBV test provides an accurate and valid, in vitro diagnostic (IVD) option for monitoring of EBV viral loads in transplant patients and should provide an opportunity for increased standardization and commutability of tests results across laboratories.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":15517,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Virology","volume":"173 ","pages":"Article 105680"},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Analytical and clinical evaluation of the cobas Epstein–Barr virus test at a tertiary care cancer hospital\",\"authors\":\"Cindy Lee ,&nbsp;Younmin Lim ,&nbsp;Deborah Saintine ,&nbsp;N.Esther Babady\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jcv.2024.105680\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Epstein–Barr Virus (EBV) viral loads in hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) recipients are typically monitored using quantitative molecular assays. The Cobas EBV test (Roche Molecular, Pleasanton, CA) has recently been FDA-cleared for the monitoring of EBV viral loads in plasma samples of transplant patients. In this study, we compared the viral loads obtained by a laboratory-developed test (EBV LDT) using Altona Analyte specific reagents (ASR) to those obtained on the Cobas EBV test.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>The analytical performance of the assay was established using the EBV verification panel from Exact Diagnostics and the EBV ATCC strain B95-8. The clinical evaluation was performed using 343 plasma samples initially tested on the EBV LDT.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>The analytical sensitivity (&lt;18.8 IU/mL), precision (SD &lt; 0.17 log) and linear range (35.0 IU/mL to 1E + 08 IU/mL) of the Cobas EBV assay established by the manufacturers were confirmed. The strength of the qualitative agreement was substantial between the cobas EBV and the EBV LDT (85.6 %; <em>κ</em> = 0.71) and almost perfect when discordant results were resolved (96.4 %; <em>κ</em> = 0.93). The quantitative agreement was moderate (82.9 %; <em>κ</em> = 0.53) with the viral load obtained on the Cobas EBV test being lower across the linear range of the two tests (mean log difference of 1.0). While the absolute values of the viral loads were markedly different, the overall trends observed in patients with multiple consecutive results were similar between the two tests.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>The Cobas EBV test provides an accurate and valid, in vitro diagnostic (IVD) option for monitoring of EBV viral loads in transplant patients and should provide an opportunity for increased standardization and commutability of tests results across laboratories.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15517,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Clinical Virology\",\"volume\":\"173 \",\"pages\":\"Article 105680\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Clinical Virology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1386653224000428\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"VIROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical Virology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1386653224000428","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"VIROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景造血干细胞移植(HSCT)受者体内的天疱疮病毒(EBV)病毒载量通常采用定量分子测定法进行监测。Cobas EBV 检测试剂盒(罗氏分子公司,加利福尼亚州普莱森顿)最近通过了 FDA 认证,可用于监测移植患者血浆样本中的 EBV 病毒载量。在这项研究中,我们比较了使用 Altona 分析特异性试剂(ASR)的实验室开发检验(EBV LDT)与 Cobas EBV 检验获得的病毒载量。结果制造商确定的 Cobas EBV 检测试剂盒的分析灵敏度(18.8 IU/mL)、精确度(SD 0.17 log)和线性范围(35.0 IU/mL 至 1E + 08 IU/mL)均得到了证实。cobas EBV 和 EBV LDT 之间的定性一致度很高(85.6%;κ = 0.71),当不一致的结果得到解决时,两者几乎完全一致(96.4%;κ = 0.93)。定量检测结果的一致性适中(82.9%;κ = 0.53),在两种检测方法的线性范围内,Cobas EBV 检测方法获得的病毒载量较低(平均对数差为 1.0)。结论 Cobas EBV 检验为监测移植患者的 EBV 病毒载量提供了一个准确有效的体外诊断 (IVD) 选择,并为提高各实验室检验结果的标准化和通用性提供了机会。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Analytical and clinical evaluation of the cobas Epstein–Barr virus test at a tertiary care cancer hospital

Background

Epstein–Barr Virus (EBV) viral loads in hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) recipients are typically monitored using quantitative molecular assays. The Cobas EBV test (Roche Molecular, Pleasanton, CA) has recently been FDA-cleared for the monitoring of EBV viral loads in plasma samples of transplant patients. In this study, we compared the viral loads obtained by a laboratory-developed test (EBV LDT) using Altona Analyte specific reagents (ASR) to those obtained on the Cobas EBV test.

Methods

The analytical performance of the assay was established using the EBV verification panel from Exact Diagnostics and the EBV ATCC strain B95-8. The clinical evaluation was performed using 343 plasma samples initially tested on the EBV LDT.

Results

The analytical sensitivity (<18.8 IU/mL), precision (SD < 0.17 log) and linear range (35.0 IU/mL to 1E + 08 IU/mL) of the Cobas EBV assay established by the manufacturers were confirmed. The strength of the qualitative agreement was substantial between the cobas EBV and the EBV LDT (85.6 %; κ = 0.71) and almost perfect when discordant results were resolved (96.4 %; κ = 0.93). The quantitative agreement was moderate (82.9 %; κ = 0.53) with the viral load obtained on the Cobas EBV test being lower across the linear range of the two tests (mean log difference of 1.0). While the absolute values of the viral loads were markedly different, the overall trends observed in patients with multiple consecutive results were similar between the two tests.

Conclusions

The Cobas EBV test provides an accurate and valid, in vitro diagnostic (IVD) option for monitoring of EBV viral loads in transplant patients and should provide an opportunity for increased standardization and commutability of tests results across laboratories.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Clinical Virology
Journal of Clinical Virology 医学-病毒学
CiteScore
22.70
自引率
1.10%
发文量
149
审稿时长
24 days
期刊介绍: The Journal of Clinical Virology, an esteemed international publication, serves as the official journal for both the Pan American Society for Clinical Virology and The European Society for Clinical Virology. Dedicated to advancing the understanding of human virology in clinical settings, the Journal of Clinical Virology focuses on disseminating research papers and reviews pertaining to the clinical aspects of virology. Its scope encompasses articles discussing diagnostic methodologies and virus-induced clinical conditions, with an emphasis on practicality and relevance to clinical practice. The journal publishes on topics that include: • new diagnostic technologies • nucleic acid amplification and serologic testing • targeted and metagenomic next-generation sequencing • emerging pandemic viral threats • respiratory viruses • transplant viruses • chronic viral infections • cancer-associated viruses • gastrointestinal viruses • central nervous system viruses • one health (excludes animal health)
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信