Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
BACKGROUND: Regular screening for Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) DNA using quantitative RT-PCR is recommended for early intervention in at-risk patients. Harmonization of quantitative RT-PCR assays is critical to avoid misinterpretation of results. Here, we compare quantitative results of the cobas® EBV assay to four commercial RT-qPCR assays. METHODS: The cobas EBV, EBV R-Gene, artus EBV RG PCR, RealStar EBV PCR kit 2.0 and Abbott EBV RealTime assays were compared for analytic performance using a 10-fold dilution series of EBV reference material, normalized to the WHO standard. For clinical performance, their quantitative results were compared using anonymized, leftover EBV-DNA-positive EDTA plasma samples. For clinical performance, accuracy and linearity of cobas EBV data from both study sites were excellent. Bland-Altman bias and Deming regression analyses showed statistical correlation for cobas EBV to both EBV R-Gene and Abbott RealTime assays but an offset of cobas EBV to artus EBV RG PCR and RealStar EBV PCR kit 2.0. CONCLUSION: The cobas EBV showed the closest correlation to the reference material, followed closely by EBV R-Gene and Abbott EBV RealTime. Values obtained are stated in IU/mL, facilitating comparison across testing sites and potentially improving utilization of guidelines for diagnosis, monitoring, and treatment of patients.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Stelzl et al. (2023) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: