4.3 Article

Cytomegalovirus (CMV) DNA quantification in bronchoalveolar lavage fluid of immunocompromised patients with CMV pneumonia

Journal

CLINICAL TRANSPLANTATION
Volume 32, Issue 1, Pages -

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/ctr.13149

Keywords

bronchoalveolar lavage; cytomegalovirus; nucleic acid test; viral load

Funding

  1. CTSA from the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS), a component of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) [UL1 TR000135]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Cytomegalovirus (CMV) pneumonia causes major morbidity and mortality. Its diagnosis requires demonstration of viral cytopathic changes in tissue, entailing risks of lung biopsy. This study aimed to determine CMV viral load (VL) thresholds in bronchoalveolar lavage fluid (BALF) for diagnosis of CMV pneumonia in immunocompromised patients. CMV VL in BALF was studied in 17 patients (83% transplant recipients) and 21 control subjects with and without CMV pneumonia, respectively, using an FDA-approved PCR assay (Cobas((R)) AmpliPrep/Cobas TaqMan((R)) CMV Test, Roche Molecular Systems, Inc.) calibrated to the WHO International Standard for CMV DNA (NIBSC: 09/162). Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis produced a BALF CMV VL threshold of 34800, IU/mL with 91.7% sensitivity and 100.0% specificity for diagnosis of possible, probable, and proven CMV pneumonia in transplant patients, while a threshold of 656000 IU/mL yielded 100% sensitivity and specificity among biopsy-proven cases. For all immunocompromised patients, a VL threshold of 274 IU/mL was selected. VL thresholds also were normalized to BALF cell count yielding a threshold of 0.32 IU/10(6) cells with 91.7% sensitivity and 90.5% specificity for possible, probable, and proven CMV pneumonia in transplant recipients. Monitoring CMV VL in BALF may be a less invasive method for diagnosing CMV pneumonia in immunocompromised patients.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available