{"title":"利用 PCR.Ai 实现多重 PCR 定量分析的自动化和标准化。","authors":"A.R. MacLean, R. Gunson","doi":"10.1016/j.jviromet.2024.114981","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>We previously undertook a prospective clinical study to evaluate PCR.Ai’s (<span><span>www.pcr.ai</span><svg><path></path></svg></span>) accuracy and impact when automating the manual data-analysis and quality control steps associated with routine clinical pathogen testing using a non-quantitative multiplex quantitative real-time PCR (qPCR). In this study we demonstrated 100 % concurrence between our manual routine analysis method and PCR.Ai. This paper expands the evaluation of PCR.Ai’s (<span><span>www.pcr.ai</span><svg><path></path></svg></span>) accuracy and impact using a multiplex quantitative real-time PCR (qPCR).</p></div><div><h3>Objectives</h3><p>We evaluated the impact of PCR.Ai when used as the final interpretation/verification step for routine in-house multiplex quantitative qPCR tests for CMV, EBV and adenovirus from blood samples for a total of 1350 interpretations.</p></div><div><h3>Study Design</h3><p>We compared PCR.Ai to our existing manual interpretation, to determine accuracy and hands on time savings.</p></div><div><h3>Results and Conclusions</h3><p>There was 100 % concurrence between validated CMV, EBV and adenovirus detection and quantitation by our manual routine analysis method and PCR.Ai. Furthermore, there were significant routine savings with PCR.Ai of 63 minutes/ run. Our conclusion is that for quantitative tests PCR.Ai is a highly accurate time-saving tool that reduces complexity of qPCR analysis and hence the need for specialists and hands-on time. It demonstrated capabilities to enable us to get results out more quickly with lower costs and less risk of errors.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":17663,"journal":{"name":"Journal of virological methods","volume":"329 ","pages":"Article 114981"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Automation and standardisation of a quantitative multiplex PCR assay using PCR.Ai\",\"authors\":\"A.R. MacLean, R. Gunson\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jviromet.2024.114981\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>We previously undertook a prospective clinical study to evaluate PCR.Ai’s (<span><span>www.pcr.ai</span><svg><path></path></svg></span>) accuracy and impact when automating the manual data-analysis and quality control steps associated with routine clinical pathogen testing using a non-quantitative multiplex quantitative real-time PCR (qPCR). In this study we demonstrated 100 % concurrence between our manual routine analysis method and PCR.Ai. This paper expands the evaluation of PCR.Ai’s (<span><span>www.pcr.ai</span><svg><path></path></svg></span>) accuracy and impact using a multiplex quantitative real-time PCR (qPCR).</p></div><div><h3>Objectives</h3><p>We evaluated the impact of PCR.Ai when used as the final interpretation/verification step for routine in-house multiplex quantitative qPCR tests for CMV, EBV and adenovirus from blood samples for a total of 1350 interpretations.</p></div><div><h3>Study Design</h3><p>We compared PCR.Ai to our existing manual interpretation, to determine accuracy and hands on time savings.</p></div><div><h3>Results and Conclusions</h3><p>There was 100 % concurrence between validated CMV, EBV and adenovirus detection and quantitation by our manual routine analysis method and PCR.Ai. Furthermore, there were significant routine savings with PCR.Ai of 63 minutes/ run. Our conclusion is that for quantitative tests PCR.Ai is a highly accurate time-saving tool that reduces complexity of qPCR analysis and hence the need for specialists and hands-on time. It demonstrated capabilities to enable us to get results out more quickly with lower costs and less risk of errors.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":17663,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of virological methods\",\"volume\":\"329 \",\"pages\":\"Article 114981\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of virological methods\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0166093424001058\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"BIOCHEMICAL RESEARCH METHODS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of virological methods","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0166093424001058","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"BIOCHEMICAL RESEARCH METHODS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Automation and standardisation of a quantitative multiplex PCR assay using PCR.Ai
Background
We previously undertook a prospective clinical study to evaluate PCR.Ai’s (www.pcr.ai) accuracy and impact when automating the manual data-analysis and quality control steps associated with routine clinical pathogen testing using a non-quantitative multiplex quantitative real-time PCR (qPCR). In this study we demonstrated 100 % concurrence between our manual routine analysis method and PCR.Ai. This paper expands the evaluation of PCR.Ai’s (www.pcr.ai) accuracy and impact using a multiplex quantitative real-time PCR (qPCR).
Objectives
We evaluated the impact of PCR.Ai when used as the final interpretation/verification step for routine in-house multiplex quantitative qPCR tests for CMV, EBV and adenovirus from blood samples for a total of 1350 interpretations.
Study Design
We compared PCR.Ai to our existing manual interpretation, to determine accuracy and hands on time savings.
Results and Conclusions
There was 100 % concurrence between validated CMV, EBV and adenovirus detection and quantitation by our manual routine analysis method and PCR.Ai. Furthermore, there were significant routine savings with PCR.Ai of 63 minutes/ run. Our conclusion is that for quantitative tests PCR.Ai is a highly accurate time-saving tool that reduces complexity of qPCR analysis and hence the need for specialists and hands-on time. It demonstrated capabilities to enable us to get results out more quickly with lower costs and less risk of errors.
期刊介绍：
The Journal of Virological Methods focuses on original, high quality research papers that describe novel and comprehensively tested methods which enhance human, animal, plant, bacterial or environmental virology and prions research and discovery.
The methods may include, but not limited to, the study of:
Viral components and morphology-
Virus isolation, propagation and development of viral vectors-
Viral pathogenesis, oncogenesis, vaccines and antivirals-
Virus replication, host-pathogen interactions and responses-
Virus transmission, prevention, control and treatment-
Viral metagenomics and virome-
Virus ecology, adaption and evolution-
Applied virology such as nanotechnology-
Viral diagnosis with novelty and comprehensive evaluation.
We seek articles, systematic reviews, meta-analyses and laboratory protocols that include comprehensive technical details with statistical confirmations that provide validations against current best practice, international standards or quality assurance programs and which advance knowledge in virology leading to improved medical, veterinary or agricultural practices and management.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
