ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology2005
Comparison of commercial real-time PCR assays for quantification of Epstein-Barr virus DNA.
Article in Journal of clinical microbiology, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 39 citations in OpenAlex.
- A multi-glycoprotein synergized recombinant virus system resolved the research dilemma of Epstein-Barr virus entry and facilitated the development of entry-specific drugs or vaccines.Current research in microbial sciences · 2026Article
- Effects of Epstein-Barr Virus Infection on CD19+ B Lymphocytes in Patients with Immunorelated Pancytopenia.Journal of immunology research · 2020Article
- Amplification chemistries in clinical virology.Journal of clinical virology : the official publication of the Pan American Society for Clinical Virology · 2019Review
- Comparison of commercial extraction systems and PCR assays for quantification of Epstein-Barr virus DNA load in whole blood.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2012Article
- Factors contributing to variability of quantitative viral PCR results in proficiency testing samples: a multivariate analysis.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2012Article
- Expression of EBV encoded viral RNA 1, 2 and anti-inflammatory cytokine (interleukin-10) in FFPE lymphoma specimens: a preliminary study for diagnostic implication in Pakistan.Diagnostic pathology · 2011Article
- Measurement of Epstein-Barr virus DNA load using a novel quantification standard containing two EBV DNA targets and SYBR Green I dye.Virology journal · 2010Article
- Using Epstein-Barr viral load assays to diagnose, monitor, and prevent posttransplant lymphoproliferative disorder.Clinical microbiology reviews · 2010Review
- Delay in B-lymphocyte recovery and function following rituximab for EBV-associated lymphoproliferative disease early post-allogeneic hematopoietic SCT.Bone marrow transplantation · 2009Review
- Laboratory assays for Epstein-Barr virus-related disease.The Journal of molecular diagnostics : JMD · 2008Review
- Evaluation of the Epstein-Barr virus R-gene quantification kit in whole blood with different extraction methods and PCR platforms.The Journal of molecular diagnostics : JMD · 2008Article
- [Acute respiratory distress syndrome complicating Ebstein-Barr virus pneumonia].Revue des maladies respiratoires · 2007Article
- Comparison of commercial and in-house Real-time PCR assays for quantification of Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) DNA in plasma.BMC microbiology · 2007Article
- Validation of Roche LightCycler Epstein-Barr virus quantification reagents in a clinical laboratory setting.The Journal of molecular diagnostics : JMD · 2006Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Clinical research suggests a role for viral load measurement in predicting and monitoring Epstein-Barr virus (EBV)-associated diseases. The aim of this study was to assess the performance of the recently commercially available quantitative assays for EBV based on real-time PCR: the RealArt EBV LC PCR kit and the LightCycler EBV quantification kit. A total of 87 samples were analyzed: 67 samples were obtained from transplant recipients and patients with EBV-associated diseases, 8 samples were obtained from the Quality Control for Molecular Diagnostics 2002 EBV Proficiency Program, and 12 negative qualitative nested PCR samples were used as negative controls. Inter- and intra-assay variabilities were determined by running replicates of two samples. All samples were run in a LightCycler instrument. The differences between positive and negative results were not considered statistically significant (P = 0.5355). There were no false-positive results using either method for nested PCR negative-control samples. The difference in viral load values using the two different methods was considered statistically significant (P < 0.01). The logarithmic linear correlation for both assays was low (r = 0.449) but significant (P < 0.01). The LightCycler EBV quantification kit showed a wider dispersal in results but produced substantially more-accurate melting temperature profile curves. The bias towards lower measurements was considerable in comparison with higher viral load. The differences in PCR efficiency and the presence of mutations could explain the disparity between the two methods. It was concluded that confidence intervals would be required to report the results rather than plain absolute values of viral load for patient monitoring.
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.