ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology2013
Multicenter evaluation of a commercial cytomegalovirus quantitative standard: effects of commutability on interlaboratory concordance.
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.
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
15 citing papers in PubMed.
- Cytomegalovirus in children undergoing haematopoietic stem cell transplantation: a diagnostic and therapeutic approach to antiviral resistance.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2023Review
- Matrix Matters: Assessment of Commutability among BK Virus Assays and Standards.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2022Article
- Impact of Fragmentation on Commutability of Epstein-Barr Virus and Cytomegalovirus Quantitative Standards.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2019Article
- A Comprehensive Statistical Framework for Determination of Commutability, Accuracy, and Agreement in Clinical DNAemia Assays.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2019Article
- Impact of CMV PCR Blips in Recipients of Solid Organ and Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation.Transplantation direct · 2018Article
- Copy Number Heterogeneity, Large Origin Tandem Repeats, and Interspecies Recombination in Human Herpesvirus 6A (HHV-6A) and HHV-6B Reference Strains.Journal of virology · 2018Article
- Human Bocavirus Capsid Messenger RNA Detection in Children With Pneumonia.The Journal of infectious diseases · 2017Article
- Progress in Quantitative Viral Load Testing: Variability and Impact of the WHO Quantitative International Standards.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2017Article
- Comparative Evaluation of Four Real-Time PCR Methods for the Quantitative Detection of Epstein-Barr Virus from Whole Blood Specimens.The Journal of molecular diagnostics : JMD · 2016Article
- Quantitative Assessment of Commutability for Clinical Viral Load Testing Using a Digital PCR-Based Reference Standard.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2016Article
- Commutability of Cytomegalovirus WHO International Standard in Different Matrices.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2016Article
- Commutability of the First World Health Organization International Standard for Human Cytomegalovirus.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2015Article
- Standardization of NAT for Blood-Borne Pathogens.Transfusion medicine and hemotherapy : offizielles Organ der Deutschen Gesellschaft fur Transfusionsmedizin und Immunhamatologie · 2015Review
- Comparative evaluation of three commercial quantitative cytomegalovirus standards by use of digital and real-time PCR.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2015Article
- Commutability of the Epstein-Barr virus WHO international standard across two quantitative PCR methods.Journal 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Commutability of quantitative reference materials has proven important for reliable and accurate results in clinical chemistry. As international reference standards and commercially produced calibration material have become available to address the variability of viral load assays, the degree to which such materials are commutable and the effect of commutability on assay concordance have been questioned. To investigate this, 60 archived clinical plasma samples, which previously tested positive for cytomegalovirus (CMV), were retested by five different laboratories, each using a different quantitative CMV PCR assay. Results from each laboratory were calibrated both with lab-specific quantitative CMV standards ("lab standards") and with common, commercially available standards ("CMV panel"). Pairwise analyses among laboratories were performed using mean results from each clinical sample, calibrated first with lab standards and then with the CMV panel. Commutability of the CMV panel was determined based on difference plots for each laboratory pair showing plotted values of standards that were within the 95% prediction intervals for the clinical specimens. Commutability was demonstrated for 6 of 10 laboratory pairs using the CMV panel. In half of these pairs, use of the CMV panel improved quantitative agreement compared to use of lab standards. Two of four laboratory pairs for which the CMV panel was noncommutable showed reduced quantitative agreement when that panel was used as a common calibrator. Commutability of calibration material varies across different quantitative PCR methods. Use of a common, commutable quantitative standard can improve agreement across different assays; use of a noncommutable calibrator can reduce agreement among laboratories.
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.