ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology2002
Accuracy of results obtained by performing a second ligase chain reaction assay and PCR analysis on urine samples with positive or near-cutoff results in the LCx test for Chlamydia trachomatis.
Article in Journal of clinical microbiology, 2002. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Advances in ligase chain reaction and ligation-based amplifications for genotyping assays: Detection and applications.Mutation research. Reviews in mutation research · 2017Review
- Diagnostic accuracy of a prototype point-of-care test for ocular Chlamydia trachomatis under field conditions in The Gambia and Senegal.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2011Article
- Molecular Diagnosis of Sexually Transmitted Chlamydia trachomatis in the United States.ISRN obstetrics and gynecology · 2011Article
- Reproducibility and specificity concerns associated with nucleic acid amplification tests for detecting Chlamydia trachomatis.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2009Review
- Detection of Chlamydia trachomatis by nucleic acid amplification testing: our evaluation suggests that CDC-recommended approaches for confirmatory testing are ill-advised.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2006Article
- Development and validation of a rotor-gene real-time PCR assay for detection, identification, and quantification of Chlamydia trachomatis in a single reaction.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2006Article
- Confirming positive results of nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) for Chlamydia trachomatis: all NAATs are not created equal.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2005Article
- External quality assessment for detection of Chlamydia trachomatis.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2005Article
- Comparison of the APTIMA CT and GC assays with the APTIMA combo 2 assay, the Abbott LCx assay, and direct fluorescent-antibody and culture assays for detection of Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2004Article
- Reproducibility of positive test results in the BDProbeTec ET system for detection of Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2003Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Nucleic acid amplification assays such as the ligase chain reaction and PCR have encountered reproducibility problems. The initial extract and a newly extracted aliquot of urine specimens (n = 120) which had signal-to-cutoff (S/CO) ratios above 0.80 by the LCx Chlamydia assay were retested. Nucleic acid was extracted from an additional urine sample for testing by the AMPLICOR PCR Chlamydia assay. Fifteen percent (18 of 120) of the urine specimens were negative by all repeat tests (initial mean S/CO ratio by the LCx Chlamydia assay, 0.93; S/CO ratio range, 0.80 to 3.30). Repeat testing of the 102 specimens with possible positive results by the LCx Chlamydia assay by use of the initially extracted aliquot confirmed the results for 95 (93.1%) of the specimens; repeat testing of a newly extracted aliquot confirmed the results for 87 (85.3%) of the specimens. Twenty specimens had discordant results by the two repeat LCx Chlamydia assays. A total of 78 of 102 (76.5%) of the specimens were positive by the AMPLICOR PCR, and the AMPLICOR PCR confirmed the results for 82.1% (78 of 95) and 89.6% (78 of 87) of the specimens positive by the two repeat LCx Chlamydia assays, respectively. Some of the discrepancies observed by multiple repeat tests may have been due to specimen mislabeling or contamination during performance of the procedure rather than to the LCx Chlamydia assay. Both assays suffered from a lack of reproducibility on repeat testing with a small proportion of specimens, probably due to the presence of low levels of DNA, the presence of variable amounts of amplification inhibitors, and the loss of DNA during extraction.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.