4.7 Article

Comparative Evaluation of Three Commercial Quantitative Cytomegalovirus Standards by Use of Digital and Real-Time PCR

Journal

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MICROBIOLOGY
Volume 53, Issue 5, Pages 1500-1505

Publisher

AMER SOC MICROBIOLOGY
DOI: 10.1128/JCM.03375-14

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. ALSAC
  2. Life Span/Tufts/Brown CFAR [P30AI042853]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The recent development of the 1st WHO International Standard for human cytomegalovirus (CMV) and the introduction of commercially produced secondary standards have raised hopes of improved agreement among laboratories performing quantitative PCR for CMV. However, data to evaluate the trueness and uniformity of secondary standards and the consistency of results achieved when these materials are run on various assays are lacking. Three concentrations of each of the three commercially prepared secondary CMV standards were tested in quadruplicate by three real-time and two digital PCR methods. The mean results were compared in a pairwise fashion with nominal values provided by each manufacturer. The agreement of results among all methods for each sample and for like concentrations of each standard was also assessed. The relationship between the nominal values of standards and the measured values varied, depending upon the assay used and the manufacturer of the standards, with the degree of bias ranging from +0.6 to -1.0 log(10) IU/ml. The mean digital PCR result differed significantly among the secondary standards, as did the results of the real-time PCRs, particularly when plotted against nominal log(10) IU values. Commercially available quantitative secondary CMV standards produce variable results when tested by different real-time and digital PCR assays, with various magnitudes of bias compared to nominal values. These findings suggest that the use of such materials may not achieve the intended uniformity among laboratories measuring CMV viral load, as envisioned by adaptation of the WHO standard.

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