Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24006002›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology2013

Comparison of six real-time PCR assays for qualitative detection of cytomegalovirus in clinical specimens.

M J Binnicker, M E Espy

Abstract readComparative StudyEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical microbiology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Cytomegalovirus DNA in non-glioblastoma multiforme brain tumors of infants.Child's nervous system : ChNS : official journal of the International Society for Pediatric Neurosurgery · 2021
    Article
  6. Journal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. CSF herpes virus and autoantibody profiles in the evaluation of encephalitis.Neurology(R) neuroimmunology & neuroinflammation · 2016
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Cost minimization analysis of an in-house molecular test for cytomegalovirus in relation to a commercial molecular system.The Brazilian journal of infectious diseases : an official publication of the Brazilian Society of Infectious Diseases
    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

2 authors.

M J BinnickerDivision of Clinical Microbiology, Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, Mayo Clinic and Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, Minnesota, USA.
M E Espy

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In this study, we compared the performance of six real-time PCR assays for the qualitative detection of cytomegalovirus (CMV) in clinical samples other than plasma. Two hundred specimens (respiratory [n = 72], urine [n = 67], cerebrospinal fluid [CSF] [n = 25], tissue [n = 18], amniotic fluid [n = 10], and bone marrow [n = 8]) submitted for routine testing by CMV real-time PCR analyte-specific reagents (ASR) (Roche Diagnostics, Indianapolis, IN) were also tested by a laboratory-developed test (LDT) and 4 commercially available PCR assays: EraGen Multicode (Luminex, Austin, TX), Focus Simplexa (Focus Diagnostics, Cypress, CA), Elitech MGB Alert CMV (Fisher Scientific, Hanover Park, IL), and Abbott CMV (Abbott Park, IL). Nucleic acid was extracted using the MagNA Pure system (Roche Diagnostics) and subsequently tested by each PCR method. Results were analyzed by comparing each assay to a "consensus result," which was defined as the result obtained from at least 4 of the 6 assays. In addition to the prospective samples, 13 lower respiratory samples with known positive results by CMV shell vial were tested by each PCR method. Following testing of the 200 prospective specimens, the Abbott, Elitech, EraGen, and Focus PCR assays demonstrated a sensitivity of 100% (46/46), while the Roche analyte-specific reagents (ASR) and LDT showed sensitivities of 89% (41/46) and 98% (45/46), respectively. Percent specificities ranged from 97% (149/154) by Elitech to 100% (154/154) by the LDT. Among the 13 shell vial-positive lower respiratory samples, the percent sensitivities ranged from 69% (9/13) by Elitech to 92% (12/13) by the LDT. The Abbott, EraGen, Elitech, Focus, and LDT PCR assays performed similarly (κ ≥ 0.89) for the detection of CMV in clinical specimens and demonstrated increased sensitivity compared to the Roche ASR.

Indexed as

CytomegalovirusCytomegalovirus InfectionsHumansMolecular Diagnostic TechniquesReal-Time Polymerase Chain ReactionSensitivity and SpecificitySpecimen HandlingViral Load

Identifiers

PMID24006002
PMCPMC3889762

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.