ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology2009
Hepatitis C virus RNA quantitation in venous and capillary small-volume whole-blood samples.
Article in Journal of clinical microbiology, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- The performance of hepatitis C virus (HCV) antibody point-of-care tests on oral fluid or whole blood and dried blood spot testing for HCV serology and viral load among individuals at higher risk for HCV in South Africa.Health science reports · 2021Article
- Dried Blood Spots for Global Health Diagnostics and Surveillance: Opportunities and Challenges.The American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene · 2018Review
- A rapid, low-cost quantitative diagnostic method for hepatitis C virus infection using capillary zone electrophoresis.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2014Article
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
Quantitation of hepatitis C virus (HCV) RNA in plasma and serum samples is a costly procedure in both time and reagents. Additionally, cell-associated viral RNA may not be detected. This study evaluated the accuracy of HCV RNA quantitation in small-volume whole-blood (WB) samples, which would be appropriate for point-of-care diagnostic devices. HCV RNA was extracted from 222 clinical plasma and WB samples of 82 patients with chronic hepatitis C by a specific locked nucleic acid-mediated capture method and quantified by real-time reverse transcription-PCR. The results were compared to the reference plasma viral load determined with the COBAS AmpliPrep/TaqMan (CAP/CTM) HCV test. This assay had an analytical sensitivity of 9 IU per 10-microl sample (95% limit of detection [95% LOD]), a linearity range of 500 to 5 x 10(6) IU/ml, and was accurate in testing 10 HCV subtypes (<0.22 log10 unit) in plasma. The assay was matrix equivalent for plasma and WB samples (coefficient of determination [R2] of 0.943) and had a specificity of 100% (n = 20) in WB samples. The HCV RNA concentration in clinical WB samples exceeded the estimated hematocrit-corrected plasma viral loads by 0.22 log10 unit, but absolute quantitation results in plasma and WB samples were identical (95% confidence interval, -0.06 to 0.04 log10 unit). The sensitivity in WB samples was 100% (n = 141) for plasma concentrations above the 95% LOD. Quantitation results in 10-microl WB samples correlated linearly with the CAP/CTM HCV plasma test results (R2 = 0.919; n = 140) and did not differ between capillary and venous samples (R2 = 0.960; n = 40). This study shows that HCV RNA quantitation in 10-microl WB samples is appropriate for monitoring viral loads of >900 IU/ml, although the use of WB does not increase the diagnostic sensitivity.
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.