ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology2012
Factors contributing to variability of quantitative viral PCR results in proficiency testing samples: a multivariate analysis.
Article in Journal of clinical microbiology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 63 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
63 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Serum and urine nucleic acid screening tests for BK polyomavirus-associated nephropathy in kidney and kidney-pancreas transplant recipients.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024Pooled it
- Improved inter-lab precision after CML international scale adoption: a 15-year history of BCR::ABL1 proficiency testing.Leukemia · 2026Article
- Evaluation of Microbiologics CMV verification panel for the quantitation of CMV DNA.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2026Article
- Harnessing miR-145 in NSCLC: mechanistic roles, diagnostic-prognostic utility, and therapeutic potential.Cancer cell international · 2025Review
- Defining a CMV viral load threshold for pre-emptive therapy in paediatric haematopoietic stem cell transplant recipients.British journal of haematology · 2025Article
- Feline enteropathogens and molecular diagnostics: benefits, limitations and clinical applications.Journal of feline medicine and surgery · 2025Review
- Inter-laboratory variability in cytomegalovirus DNA quantification: implications for standardization and clinical monitoring.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2025Article
- Using machine learning models to predict the impact of template mismatches on polymerase chain reaction assay performance.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- The impact of FDA-cleared molecular solutions for BK polyomavirus quantitation.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2025Review
- Article
- RT-qPCR Testing and Performance Metrics in the COVID-19 Era.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Review
- Accuracy of quantitative viral secondary standards: a re-examination.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2024Article
- Cytomegalovirus Pneumonia in a Patient with Down Syndrome.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2024Article
- Quantification of mRNA in Lipid Nanoparticles Using Mass Spectrometry.Analytical chemistry · 2024Article
- Normalizing real-time PCR results in routine testing.Journal of veterinary diagnostic investigation : official publication of the American Association of Veterinary Laboratory Diagnosticians, Inc · 2024Article
- Advances and Challenges in Cytomegalovirus Detection Methods for Liver Transplant Donors.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Article
- Primary Quantitative Reference Standards for Viral Nucleic Acids Should Be Developed Using Digital Polymerase Chain Reaction Instead of Consensus Testing.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2023Article
- Approach to hematopoietic cell transplant candidates with respiratory viral detection.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2023Review
- Evaluation of factors contributing to variability of qualitative and quantitative proficiency testing for SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid detection.Biosafety and health · 2022Article
3 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
While viral load testing has gained widespread acceptance, a primary limitation remains the variability of results, particularly between different laboratories. While some work has demonstrated the importance of standardized quantitative control material in reducing this variability, little has been done to explore other important factors in the molecular amplification process. Results of 185 laboratories enrolled in the College of American Pathologists (CAP) 2009 viral load proficiency testing (PT) survey (VLS) were examined. This included 165 labs (89.2%) testing for cytomegalovirus (CMV), 99 (53.5%) for Epstein-Barr virus (EBV), and 64 (34.6%) for BK virus (BKV). At the time of PT, laboratories were asked a series of questions to characterize their testing methods. The responses to these questions were correlated to mean viral load (MVL) and result variability (RV). Contribution of individual factors to RV was estimated through analysis of variance (ANOVA) modeling and the use of backward selection of factors to fit those models. Selection of the quantitative calibrator, commercially prepared primers and probes, and amplification target gene were found most prominently associated with changes in MVL or RV for one or more of the viruses studied. Commercially prepared primers and probes and amplification target gene made the largest contribution to overall variability. Factors contributing to MVL and RV differed among viruses, as did relative contribution of each factor to overall variability. The marked variability seen in clinical quantitative viral load results is associated with multiple aspects of molecular testing design and performance. The reduction of such variability will require a multifaceted approach to improve the accuracy, reliability, and clinical utility of these important tests.
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.