首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>Journal of Clinical Microbiology >Comparative Evaluation of Three Automated Systems for DNA Extraction in Conjunction with Three Commercially Available Real-Time PCR Assays for Quantitation of Plasma Cytomegalovirus DNAemia in Allogeneic Stem Cell Transplant Recipients
【2h】

Comparative Evaluation of Three Automated Systems for DNA Extraction in Conjunction with Three Commercially Available Real-Time PCR Assays for Quantitation of Plasma Cytomegalovirus DNAemia in Allogeneic Stem Cell Transplant Recipients

机译:对三种自动化系统的DNA提取与三种同种异体干细胞移植受者血浆中巨细胞病毒DNAemia定量定量的三种市售实时PCR分析方法的比较评估

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Limited data are available on the performance of different automated extraction platforms and commercially available quantitative real-time PCR (QRT-PCR) methods for the quantitation of cytomegalovirus (CMV) DNA in plasma. We compared the performance characteristics of the Abbott mSample preparation system DNA kit on the m24 SP instrument (Abbott), the High Pure viral nucleic acid kit on the COBAS AmpliPrep system (Roche), and the EZ1 Virus 2.0 kit on the BioRobot EZ1 extraction platform (Qiagen) coupled with the Abbott CMV PCR kit, the LightCycler CMV Quant kit (Roche), and the Q-CMV complete kit (Nanogen), for both plasma specimens from allogeneic stem cell transplant (Allo-SCT) recipients (n = 42) and the OptiQuant CMV DNA panel (AcroMetrix). The EZ1 system displayed the highest extraction efficiency over a wide range of CMV plasma DNA loads, followed by the m24 and the AmpliPrep methods. The Nanogen PCR assay yielded higher mean CMV plasma DNA values than the Abbott and the Roche PCR assays, regardless of the platform used for DNA extraction. Overall, the effects of the extraction method and the QRT-PCR used on CMV plasma DNA load measurements were less pronounced for specimens with high CMV DNA content (>10,000 copies/ml). The performance characteristics of the extraction methods and QRT-PCR assays evaluated herein for clinical samples were extensible at cell-based standards from AcroMetrix. In conclusion, different automated systems are not equally efficient for CMV DNA extraction from plasma specimens, and the plasma CMV DNA loads measured by commercially available QRT-PCRs can differ significantly. The above findings should be taken into consideration for the establishment of cutoff values for the initiation or cessation of preemptive antiviral therapies and for the interpretation of data from clinical studies in the Allo-SCT setting.
机译:关于不同自动提取平台的性能以及用于定量血浆中巨细胞病毒(CMV)DNA的商业定量实时PCR(QRT-PCR)方法的数据有限。我们比较了m24 SP仪器(Abbott)上的Abbott mSample制备系统DNA试剂盒,COBAS AmpliPrep系统(Roche)上的高纯病毒核酸试剂盒和BioRobot EZ1提取平台上的EZ1 Virus 2.0试剂盒的性能特征。 (Qiagen)与Abbott CMV PCR试剂盒,LightCycler CMV Quant试剂盒(Roche)和Q-CMV完整试剂盒(Nanogen)结合,用于同种异体干细胞移植(Allo-SCT)受者的两个血浆标本(n = 42 )和OptiQuant CMV DNA面板(AcroMetrix)。 EZ1系统在各种CMV血浆DNA负载范围内显示出最高的提取效率,其次是m24和AmpliPrep方法。不管用于DNA提取的平台如何,与Abbott和Roche PCR分析相比,Nanogen PCR分析产生的平均CMV血浆DNA值更高。总体而言,对于高CMV DNA含量(> 10,000拷贝/ ml)的标本,提取方法和QRT-PCR对CMV血浆DNA负荷测量的影响不太明显。本文评估的临床样品的提取方法和QRT-PCR分析的性能特征可在AcroMetrix的基于细胞的标准液中扩展。总之,对于从血浆样本中提取CMV DNA而言,不同的自动化系统的效率不尽相同,并且通过商用QRT-PCR测得的血浆CMV DNA负载可能存在显着差异。在确定起始值或终止先发性抗病毒治疗的临界值以及解释Allo-SCT环境中的临床研究数据时,应考虑上述发现。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号