Evidence map›Paper›PMID 10878053›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology2000

Analytical sensitivity, reproducibility of results, and clinical performance of five PCR assays for detecting Chlamydia pneumoniae DNA in peripheral blood mononuclear cells.

J B Mahony, S Chong, B K Coombes, M Smieja, A Petrich

Open access · greenAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical microbiology, 2000. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
6.0field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

24 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 59 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. ERA-CRISPR/Cas12a-based, fast and specific diagnostic detection forFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2024
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Infectious agents and neurodegeneration.Molecular neurobiology · 2012
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Chlamydophila pneumoniae Infection and Its Role in Neurological Disorders.Interdisciplinary perspectives on infectious diseases · 2010
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

J B MahonyHamilton Regional Laboratory Medicine Program, St. Joseph's Hospital, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada. mahonyj@fhs.mcmaster.ca
S Chong
B K Coombes
M Smieja
A Petrich
Hamilton Regional Laboratory Medicine Program · CAMcMaster University · CANenagh Hospital · IE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Chlamydia pneumoniae has been associated with atherosclerosis and coronary artery disease (CAD), and its DNA has been detected in atheromatous lesions of the aorta, carotid, and coronary arteries by a variety of PCR assays. The objective of this study was to compare the performances of five published PCR assays in the detection of C. pneumoniae in peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) from patients with coronary artery disease. The assays included two conventional PCRs, one targeting a cloned PstI fragment and one targeting the 16S rRNA gene; two nested PCRs, one targeting the 16S rRNA gene and one targeting ompA; and a touchdown enzyme time release (TETR) PCR, targeting the 16S rRNA gene. All PCRs had similar analytical sensitivities and detected a minimum of 0.005 inclusion-forming units (IFU) of C. pneumoniae; the ompA nested PCR and the TETR PCR were slightly more sensitive and detected 0.001 IFU. Assay reproducibility was examined by testing 10 replicates of C. pneumoniae DNA by each assay. All five assays showed excellent reproducibility at high levels of DNA, with scores of 10 out of 10 for 0.01 IFU, but exhibited decreased reproducibility for smaller numbers of C. pneumoniae IFU for all tests. Pairwise comparison of test results indicated that there was a significant difference between tests (Cochran Q = 32.0, P<0.001), with the PstI fragment (P<0.001) and 16S rRNA (P = 0.002) assays having lower reproducibility than the nested ompA and TETR assays. To further analyze assay sensitivity, C. pneumoniae-infected U-937 mononuclear cells were added to whole blood, and extracted mononuclear-cell DNA was tested by each assay. All five assays showed similar sensitivities, detecting 15 infected cells; three assays detected 3 infected cells, while all assays were negative at the next dilution (1.5 infected cells). A striking difference in performance of the five assays was seen, however, when PBMCs from CAD patients were tested for C. pneumoniae DNA. The ompA nested PCR detected C. pneumoniae DNA in 11 of 148 (7.4%) specimens, the 16S rRNA nested PCR detected 2 positives among the 148 specimens (1.4%) (P<0.001), and the other 3 assays detected no positive specimens (P<0.001, compared with the ompA assay). These results indicate that analytical sensitivity alone does not predict the ability of an assay to detect C. pneumoniae in whole-blood-derived PBMCs. Before standardized assays can be used in wide-scale epidemiological studies, further characterization of these assays will be required to improve our understanding of their performance in the detection of C. pneumoniae in clinical material.

Indexed as

Bacterial Outer Membrane ProteinsChlamydia InfectionsChlamydophila pneumoniaeCoronary DiseaseDNA, BacterialGenes, rRNAHumansLeukocytes, MononuclearPolymerase Chain ReactionReproducibility of ResultsRNA, Ribosomal, 16SSensitivity and SpecificityU937 CellsBacterial Outer Membrane ProteinsDNA, BacterialOMPA outer membrane proteinsRNA, Ribosomal, 16S

Identifiers

PMID10878053
PMCPMC86981
OpenAlexW1841837881

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.