4.7 Review

Aspergillus Polymerase Chain Reaction: Systematic Review of Evidence for Clinical Use in Comparison With Antigen Testing

期刊

CLINICAL INFECTIOUS DISEASES
卷 61, 期 8, 页码 1293-1303

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1093/cid/civ507

关键词

Aspergillus; PCR; galactomannan; beta-D-glucan; aspergillosis

资金

  1. Myconostica
  2. Luminex
  3. Renishaw Diagnostics
  4. MSD
  5. Gilead Sciences
  6. Pfizer
  7. Astellas
  8. Merck
  9. Schering- Plough
  10. MSD Australia
  11. Pfizer Australia
  12. Scynexis
  13. T2 Biosystems
  14. Viamet

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background. Aspergillus polymerase chain reaction (PCR) was excluded from the European Organisation for the Research and Treatment of Cancer/Mycoses Study Group (EORTC/MSG) definitions of invasive fungal disease because of limited standardization and validation. The definitions are being revised. Methods. A systematic literature review was performed to identify analytical and clinical information available on inclusion of galactomannan enzyme immunoassay (GM-EIA) (2002) and beta-D-glucan (2008), providing a minimal threshold when considering PCR. Categorical parameters and statistical performance were compared. Results. When incorporated, GM-EIA and beta-D-glucan sensitivities and specificities for diagnosing invasive aspergillosis were 81.6% and 91.6%, and 76.9% and 89.4%, respectively. Aspergillus PCR has similar sensitivity and specificity (76.8%-88.0% and 75.0%-94.5%, respectively) and comparable utility. Methodological recommendations and commercial PCR assays assist standardization. Although all tests have limitations, currently, PCR is the only test with independent quality control. Conclusions. We propose that there is sufficient evidence that is at least equivalent to that used to include GM-EIA and beta-D-glucan testing, and that PCR is now mature enough for inclusion in the EORTC/MSG definitions.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据