Laura Mannonen, Pia Jokela, Marianne Kragh Thomsen, Sabine Yerly, Gustavo Cilla, Daniel Jarem, Jesse A Canchola, Mark Hopkins
{"title":"cobas EBV 和 cobas BKV 检测的性能:标准化定量的多点比较。","authors":"Laura Mannonen, Pia Jokela, Marianne Kragh Thomsen, Sabine Yerly, Gustavo Cilla, Daniel Jarem, Jesse A Canchola, Mark Hopkins","doi":"10.1128/jcm.00267-24","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Guidelines recommend monitoring of Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) and BK virus (BKV) in solid organ and hematopoietic stem cell transplant patients. The majority of quantitative DNA testing for EBV and BKV employs unstandardized individual laboratory-developed testing solutions (LDTs), with implications for accuracy, reproducibility, and comparability between laboratories. The performance of the cobas EBV and cobas BKV assays was assessed across five laboratories, using the World Health Organization International Standards (WHO IS) for EBV and BKV, and the National Institute of Standards and Technology Quantitative Standard for BKV, and results were compared with the LDTs in use at the time. Methods were also compared using locally sourced clinical specimens. Variation was high when laboratories reported EBV or BKV DNA values using LDTs, where quantitative values were observed to differ by up to 1.5 log<sub>10</sub> unit/mL between sites. Conversely, results from the cobas EBV and cobas BKV assays were accurate and reproducible across sites and on different testing days. Adjustment of LDTs using the international standards led to closer alignment between the assays; however, day-to-day reproducibility of LDTs remained high. In addition, BKV continued to show bias, indicating challenges with the commutability of the BKV International Standard. The cobas EBV and cobas BKV assays are automated, aligned to the WHO IS, and have the potential to reduce the variability in viral load testing introduced by differences in LDTs. Standardization of reporting values may eventually allow different centers to compare data to allow clinical decision thresholds to be established supporting improvements in patient management.IMPORTANCEThe application of center-specific cut-offs for clinical decisions and the variability of LDTs often hinder interpretation; thus, the findings reported here support the need for standardization in the field of post-transplant monitoring of EBV and BKV to improve patient management. Alongside the choice of assay, it is also important to consider which standard to use when deciding upon a testing methodology. This is a call to action for standardization, as treatment for EBV and BKV is driven by viral load test results, and the more accurate and comparable the test results are across institutions, the more informed and better the treatment decisions can be.</p>","PeriodicalId":15511,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Microbiology","volume":" ","pages":"e0026724"},"PeriodicalIF":6.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11323559/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Performance of the cobas EBV and cobas BKV assays: multi-site comparison of standardized quantitation.\",\"authors\":\"Laura Mannonen, Pia Jokela, Marianne Kragh Thomsen, Sabine Yerly, Gustavo Cilla, Daniel Jarem, Jesse A Canchola, Mark Hopkins\",\"doi\":\"10.1128/jcm.00267-24\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Guidelines recommend monitoring of Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) and BK virus (BKV) in solid organ and hematopoietic stem cell transplant patients. The majority of quantitative DNA testing for EBV and BKV employs unstandardized individual laboratory-developed testing solutions (LDTs), with implications for accuracy, reproducibility, and comparability between laboratories. The performance of the cobas EBV and cobas BKV assays was assessed across five laboratories, using the World Health Organization International Standards (WHO IS) for EBV and BKV, and the National Institute of Standards and Technology Quantitative Standard for BKV, and results were compared with the LDTs in use at the time. Methods were also compared using locally sourced clinical specimens. Variation was high when laboratories reported EBV or BKV DNA values using LDTs, where quantitative values were observed to differ by up to 1.5 log<sub>10</sub> unit/mL between sites. Conversely, results from the cobas EBV and cobas BKV assays were accurate and reproducible across sites and on different testing days. Adjustment of LDTs using the international standards led to closer alignment between the assays; however, day-to-day reproducibility of LDTs remained high. In addition, BKV continued to show bias, indicating challenges with the commutability of the BKV International Standard. The cobas EBV and cobas BKV assays are automated, aligned to the WHO IS, and have the potential to reduce the variability in viral load testing introduced by differences in LDTs. Standardization of reporting values may eventually allow different centers to compare data to allow clinical decision thresholds to be established supporting improvements in patient management.IMPORTANCEThe application of center-specific cut-offs for clinical decisions and the variability of LDTs often hinder interpretation; thus, the findings reported here support the need for standardization in the field of post-transplant monitoring of EBV and BKV to improve patient management. Alongside the choice of assay, it is also important to consider which standard to use when deciding upon a testing methodology. This is a call to action for standardization, as treatment for EBV and BKV is driven by viral load test results, and the more accurate and comparable the test results are across institutions, the more informed and better the treatment decisions can be.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15511,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Clinical Microbiology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"e0026724\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11323559/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Clinical Microbiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1128/jcm.00267-24\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/7/24 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MICROBIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical Microbiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1128/jcm.00267-24","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/7/24 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MICROBIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Performance of the cobas EBV and cobas BKV assays: multi-site comparison of standardized quantitation.
Guidelines recommend monitoring of Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) and BK virus (BKV) in solid organ and hematopoietic stem cell transplant patients. The majority of quantitative DNA testing for EBV and BKV employs unstandardized individual laboratory-developed testing solutions (LDTs), with implications for accuracy, reproducibility, and comparability between laboratories. The performance of the cobas EBV and cobas BKV assays was assessed across five laboratories, using the World Health Organization International Standards (WHO IS) for EBV and BKV, and the National Institute of Standards and Technology Quantitative Standard for BKV, and results were compared with the LDTs in use at the time. Methods were also compared using locally sourced clinical specimens. Variation was high when laboratories reported EBV or BKV DNA values using LDTs, where quantitative values were observed to differ by up to 1.5 log10 unit/mL between sites. Conversely, results from the cobas EBV and cobas BKV assays were accurate and reproducible across sites and on different testing days. Adjustment of LDTs using the international standards led to closer alignment between the assays; however, day-to-day reproducibility of LDTs remained high. In addition, BKV continued to show bias, indicating challenges with the commutability of the BKV International Standard. The cobas EBV and cobas BKV assays are automated, aligned to the WHO IS, and have the potential to reduce the variability in viral load testing introduced by differences in LDTs. Standardization of reporting values may eventually allow different centers to compare data to allow clinical decision thresholds to be established supporting improvements in patient management.IMPORTANCEThe application of center-specific cut-offs for clinical decisions and the variability of LDTs often hinder interpretation; thus, the findings reported here support the need for standardization in the field of post-transplant monitoring of EBV and BKV to improve patient management. Alongside the choice of assay, it is also important to consider which standard to use when deciding upon a testing methodology. This is a call to action for standardization, as treatment for EBV and BKV is driven by viral load test results, and the more accurate and comparable the test results are across institutions, the more informed and better the treatment decisions can be.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Clinical Microbiology® disseminates the latest research concerning the laboratory diagnosis of human and animal infections, along with the laboratory's role in epidemiology and the management of infectious diseases.