4.7 Article

Are We There Yet? Impact of the First International Standard for Cytomegalovirus DNA on the Harmonization of Results Reported on Plasma Samples

Journal

CLINICAL INFECTIOUS DISEASES
Volume 63, Issue 5, Pages 583-589

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1093/cid/ciw370

Keywords

cytomegalovirus; international standard; result harmonization; viral load

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background. Interassay harmonization of cytomegalovirus (CMV) DNA measurement is important for infection management. Uncertainty exists regarding the result harmonization achievable in patient plasma samples using quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) assays with calibrators now traceable to the First World Health Organization International Standard (IS) for CMV DNA. Method. Serial dilutions of the IS and a blinded panel of 40 genotyped CMV DNA-positive pooled plasma samples and 10 negative plasma samples were tested by 6 laboratories using 10 qPCR assays calibrated to the IS. Each clinical sample was constructed using plasma from a single unique transplant recipient. Results. The variance for individual CMV DNA-positive samples was greater for clinical samples (median, 1.50 [range, 1.22-2.82] log(10) IU/mL) than for IS dilutions (median, 0.94 [range, 0.69-1.35] log(10) IU/mL) (P < .001); 58.9% of all clinical sample results and 93.6% of IS dilution results fell within +/- 0.5 log(10) IU/mL of the mean viral load of each sample. Result variability was not impacted by either genotype or quantitative levels of CMV DNA. Testing procedure differences can significantly influence results, even when analyte-specific reagents are identical. For clinical samples, all assays demonstrated result bias (P < .008). Assays with amplicon sizes <= 86 bp had significantly higher results compared to assays with larger amplicon sizes (>= 105 bp) (P < .001). Conclusions. The variability in CMV DNA results reported on individual samples has been reduced by the IS, but ongoing clinically relevant variability persists, preventing meaningful interassay result comparison.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available