ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology2016
Performance of the New Aptima HCV Quant Dx Assay in Comparison to the Cobas TaqMan HCV2 Test for Use with the High Pure System in Detection and Quantification of Hepatitis C Virus RNA in Plasma or Serum.
Article in Journal of clinical microbiology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Performance Evaluation of the Aptima Assays in Comparison with the cobas 6800 Assays for the Detection of HIV-1, HBV, and HCV in Clinical Samples.Annals of laboratory medicine · 2022Article
- Performance Evaluation ofFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2021Article
- Evaluation of the Aptima HCV Quant Dx Assay Using Serum and Dried Blood Spots.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2019Article
- Hepatitis C virus: life cycle in cells, infection and host response, and analysis of molecular markers influencing the outcome of infection and response to therapy.Clinical microbiology and infection : the official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases · 2016Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Quantitating the level of hepatitis C virus (HCV) RNA is the standard of care for monitoring HCV-infected patients during treatment. The performances of commercially available assays differ for precision, limit of detection, and limit of quantitation (LOQ). Here, we compare the performance of the Hologic Aptima HCV Quant Dx assay (Aptima) to that of the Roche Cobas TaqMan HCV test, version 2.0, using the High Pure system (HPS/CTM), considered a reference assay since it has been used in trials defining clinical decision points in patient care. The assays' performance characteristics were assessed using HCV RNA reference panels and plasma/serum from chronically HCV-infected patients. The agreement between the assays for the 3 reference panels was good, with a difference in quantitation values of <0.5 log. High concordance was demonstrated between the assays for 245 clinical samples (kappa = 0.80; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.720 to 0.881); however, Aptima detected and/or quantitated 20 samples that HPS/CTM did not detect, while Aptima did not detect 1 sample that was quantitated by HPS/CTM. For the 165 samples quantitated by both assays, the values were highly correlated (R= 0.98;P< 0.0001). The linearity of quantitation from concentrations of 1.4 to 6 log was excellent for both assays for all HCV genotypes (GT) tested (GT 1a, 1b, 2b, and 3a) (R(2)> 0.99). The assays had similar levels of total and intra-assay variability across all genotypes at concentrations from 1,000 to 25 IU/ml. Aptima had a greater analytical sensitivity, quantitating more than 50% of replicates at 25-IU/ml target. Aptima showed performance characteristics comparable to those of HPS/CTM and increased sensitivity, making it suitable for use as a clinical diagnostic tool on the fully automated Panther platform.
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.