Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Detection and monitoring of acute infection or reactivation of Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) are critical for treatment decision-making and to reduce the risk of EBV-related malignancies and other associated diseases in immunocompromised individuals. The analytical and clinical performance of the Alinity m EBV assay was evaluated at two independent study sites; analytical performance was assessed by evaluating precision with a commercially available 5-member EBV verification panel, while the clinical performance of the Alinity m EBV assay was compared to the RealTi me EBV assay and a laboratory-developed test (LDT) as the routine test of record (TOR). Analytical analysis demonstrated standard deviation (SD) between 0.08 and 0.13 Log IU/mL. A total of 300 remnant plasma specimens were retested with the Alinity m EBV assay, and results were compared to those of the TOR at the respective study sites ( n = 148 with the RealTi m e EBV assay and n = 152 with the LDT EBV assay). Agreement between Alinity m EBV and RealTi m e EBV or LDT EBV assays had kappa values of 0.88 and 0.84, respectively, with correlation coefficients r of 0.956 and 0.912, while the corresponding observed mean bias was −0.02 and −0.19 Log IU/mL. The Alinity m EBV assay had a short median onboard turnaround time of 2:40 h. Thus, the Alinity m system can shorten the time to results and, therefore, to therapy.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Wessels et al. (2023) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: