Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16760328›Full record

ArticleClinical and vaccine immunology : CVI2006

Evaluation of the interlaboratory concordance in quantification of human immunodeficiency virus-specific T cells with a gamma interferon enzyme-linked immunospot assay.

A Samri, C Durier, A Urrutia, I Sanchez, H Gahery-Segard, S Imbart, M Sinet, E Tartour, J-P Aboulker, B Autran and 2 more

Open access · diamondAbstract readComparative StudyEvaluation StudyMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical and vaccine immunology : CVI, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 25% 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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 30 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. 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

12 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

A SamriLaboratoire d'Immunologie Cellulaire et Tissulaire, AP-HP, Hôpital Pitié-Salpêtrière, INSERM UMR S 543, Université Pierre et Marie Curie, Paris 6, Paris, France.
C Durier
A Urrutia
I Sanchez
H Gahery-Segard
S Imbart
M Sinet
E Tartour
J-P Aboulker
B Autran
A Venet
ANRS ELISpot Standardization Group
Université Paris-Sud · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The gamma interferon (IFN-gamma) enzyme-linked immunospot (ELISPOT) assay is a reference method for the ex vivo monitoring of antigen-specific T cells and a primary tool for assessing clinical trials of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) or cancer vaccines. Four experienced laboratories in Paris compared their results with this method by exchanging frozen blood samples from eight HIV-seronegative and eight HIV-seropositive subjects. Each laboratory measured the IFN-gamma-producing cells specific for HIV, Epstein-Barr virus, cytomegalovirus, and influenza using the same set of peptides and the same ELISPOT reader but its own ELISPOT technique. The cutoff values for positive responses (50 or 100 spot-forming cells/10(6) peripheral blood mononuclear cells over background) were consistent with the binomial statistic criterion. The global qualitative concordance, as assessed by the kappa index, ranged from 0.38 to 0.92, that is, moderate to excellent, and was better for non-HIV 9-mer peptide pools than for HIV 15-mer peptide pools. The interlaboratory coefficient of variation for the frequency of virus-specific T cells was 18.7% (data are expressed on a log scale). Clustering analysis of HIV-positive subjects showed qualitative agreement for ELISPOT results from all four laboratories. Overall, the good interlaboratory qualitative concordance of IFN-gamma ELISPOT assays with only the peptide source and ELISPOT reader in common suggests that a qualitative comparison of interlaboratory findings is feasible. Nonetheless, a single set of standard operating procedures should be used in multicenter trials to improve standardization.

Indexed as

AntibodiesCluster AnalysisEnzyme-Linked Immunosorbent AssayEpitopes, T-LymphocyteHIV InfectionsHumansInterferon-gammaPeptidesReproducibility of ResultsStatistics, NonparametricT-LymphocytesAntibodiesEpitopes, T-LymphocyteInterferon-gammaPeptides

Identifiers

PMID16760328
PMCPMC1489560
OpenAlexW2167352312

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.