...
首页> 外文期刊>Annals of laboratory medicine. >Comparison of the QIAGEN artus HBV QS-RGQ Assay With the Roche COBAS AmpliPrep/COBAS TaqMan HBV Assay for Quantifying Viral DNA in Sera of Chronic Hepatitis B Patients
【24h】

Comparison of the QIAGEN artus HBV QS-RGQ Assay With the Roche COBAS AmpliPrep/COBAS TaqMan HBV Assay for Quantifying Viral DNA in Sera of Chronic Hepatitis B Patients

机译:QIAGEN动脉HBV QS-RGQ测定法与Roche COBAS AmpliPrep / COBAS TaqMan HBV测定法在慢性乙型肝炎患者血清中定量DNA的比较

获取原文
           

摘要

Background: Hepatitis B virus DNA quantification is essential for managing chronic hepatitis B (CHB). We compared the performance of artus HBV QS-RGQ (QIAGEN GmbH, Germany) and CAP/CTM v2.0 HBV assays (Roche Molecular Diagnostics, USA) in CHB patients. Methods: A comparative evaluation between two assays was performed with 508 clinical serum samples. Precision, linearity, and the limit of detection (LOD) of QS-RGQ assay was evaluated by using the WHO standard 97/750 and clinical samples. Results: Detection rates and viral loads as determined QS-RGQ assay were significantly lower than those from the CAP/CTM v2.0 assay (52.8% vs 60.6%; 3.55±1.77 IU/mL vs 4.18±1.89 IU/mL, P10 IU/mL (95% limit of agreement, ?1.48 to 0.22). Repeatability and total imprecision (% CV) of the QS-RGQ assay were 1.0% and 1.1% at 2,000 IU/mL, and 0.7% and 1.4% at 20,000 IU/mL, respectively. Linearity of this assay ranged from 31.6 to 1.0±107 IU/mL, and the LOD was 2.95 IU/mL. Conclusions: The artus HBV QS-RGQ assay showed good performance but significantly decreased detection rate and viral load compared with CAP/CTM v2.0 assays. This assay recommends using plasma; however, we used stored serum because of the retrospective study design. Usually HBV DNA quantification is performed in plasma or serum, but sample type and clinical relevance of quantitative values should be considered when determining the clinical application of this reagent.
机译:背景:乙型肝炎病毒DNA定量对于控制慢性乙型肝炎(CHB)至关重要。我们比较了CHB患者的Artus HBV QS-RGQ(德国QIAGEN GmbH)和CAP / CTM v2.0 HBV检测(美国Roche Molecular Diagnostics)的性能。方法:用508份临床血清样品进行了两种测定之间的比较评价。通过使用WHO标准97/750和临床样品评估QS-RGQ测定的精密度,线性和检测极限(LOD)。结果:QS-RGQ测定法的检出率和病毒载量显着低于CAP / CTM v2.0测定法的检出率和病毒载量(52.8%vs 60.6%; 3.55±1.77 IU / mL vs 4.18±1.89 IU / mL,P10 IU / mL(一致限的95%,? 1.48至0.22)。在2,000 IU / mL下,QS-RGQ分析的重复性和总不准确度(%CV)分别为1.0%和1.1%,在20,000 IU / mL下为0.7%和1.4% / mL,该方法的线性范围为31.6至1.0±107 IU / mL,LOD为2.95 IU / mL。结论:乙肝HBV QS-RGQ检测方法性能良好,但检出率和病毒载量明显降低使用CAP / CTM v2.0分析法时,建议使用血浆;然而,由于采用回顾性研究设计,我们使用了储存的血清,通常在血浆或血清中进行HBV DNA定量,但应根据样本类型和定量值的临床相关性确定该试剂的临床应用时应考虑的因素。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

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