Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27487852›Full record

ArticleBMC infectious diseases2016

The use of digital PCR to improve the application of quantitative molecular diagnostic methods for tuberculosis.

Alison S Devonshire, Denise M O'Sullivan, Isobella Honeyborne, Gerwyn Jones, Maria Karczmarczyk, Jernej Pavšič, Alice Gutteridge, Mojca Milavec, Pablo Mendoza, Heinz Schimmel and 21 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC infectious diseases, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.8field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
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

29 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 53 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Detection ofPathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Development of a droplet digital PCR assay for quantification of the proviral load of bovine leukemia virus.Journal of veterinary diagnostic investigation : official publication of the American Association of Veterinary Laboratory Diagnosticians, Inc · 2022
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Culture-Free Enumeration ofMicroorganisms · 2022
    Article
  12. Review
  13. Application of Droplet Digital PCR to Detection ofInfection and drug resistance · 2022
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Veterinary world · 2020
    Review
  19. Article
  20. 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

31 authors at 12 institutions in 8 countries.

Alison S DevonshireMolecular and Cell Biology, LGC, Queens Road, Teddington, TW11 0LY, UK.
Denise M O'SullivanMolecular and Cell Biology, LGC, Queens Road, Teddington, TW11 0LY, UK.
Isobella HoneyborneCentre for Clinical Microbiology, Department of Infection, University College London, Royal Free Campus, London, UK.
Gerwyn JonesMolecular and Cell Biology, LGC, Queens Road, Teddington, TW11 0LY, UK.
Maria KarczmarczykEuropean Commission, Joint Research Centre (JRC), Institute for Reference Materials and Measurements (IRMM), Geel, Belgium.
Jernej PavšičNational Institute of Biology, Večna pot 111, 1000, Ljubljana, Slovenia.
Alice GutteridgeMolecular and Cell Biology, LGC, Queens Road, Teddington, TW11 0LY, UK.
Mojca MilavecNational Institute of Biology, Večna pot 111, 1000, Ljubljana, Slovenia.
Pablo MendozaVircell S.L. Molecular Diagnostic Department, The Technology Park of Health Sciences, Granada, Spain.
Heinz SchimmelEuropean Commission, Joint Research Centre (JRC), Institute for Reference Materials and Measurements (IRMM), Geel, Belgium.
Fran Van HeuverswynEuropean Commission, Joint Research Centre (JRC), Institute for Reference Materials and Measurements (IRMM), Geel, Belgium.
Rebecca GortonCentre for Clinical Microbiology, Department of Infection, University College London, Royal Free Campus, London, UK.
Daniela Maria CirilloTB Supranational Reference Laboratory, San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy.
Emanuele BorroniTB Supranational Reference Laboratory, San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy.
Kathryn HarrisMicrobiology, Virology and Infection Control, Great Ormond Street Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Marinus BarnardCentre for Clinical Tuberculosis Research, TASK Applied Science, Cape Town, South Africa.
Anthenette HeydenrychCentre for Clinical Tuberculosis Research, TASK Applied Science, Cape Town, South Africa.
Norah NdusiloKCRI, Moshi, Tanzania.
Carole L WallisBARC-SA and Mycobacteriology Department, Lancet Laboratories, Johannesburg, South Africa.
Keshree PillayBARC-SA and Mycobacteriology Department, Lancet Laboratories, Johannesburg, South Africa.
Thomas BarryNucleic Acid Diagnostics Research Laboratory (NADRL), Microbiology, School of Natural Sciences, National University of Ireland, Galway, Ireland.
Kate ReddingtonNucleic Acid Diagnostics Research Laboratory (NADRL), Microbiology, School of Natural Sciences, National University of Ireland, Galway, Ireland.
Elvira RichterForschungszentrum Borstel, National Reference Centre for Mycobacteria, Borstel, D-23845, Germany.
Erkan MozioğluUME, Ulusal Metroloji Enstitüsü, Gebze, Kocaeli, Turkey.
Sema AkyürekUME, Ulusal Metroloji Enstitüsü, Gebze, Kocaeli, Turkey.
Burhanettin YalçınkayaUME, Ulusal Metroloji Enstitüsü, Gebze, Kocaeli, Turkey.
Muslum AkgozUME, Ulusal Metroloji Enstitüsü, Gebze, Kocaeli, Turkey.
Jana ŽelNational Institute of Biology, Večna pot 111, 1000, Ljubljana, Slovenia.
Carole A FoyMolecular and Cell Biology, LGC, Queens Road, Teddington, TW11 0LY, UK.
Timothy D McHughCentre for Clinical Microbiology, Department of Infection, University College London, Royal Free Campus, London, UK.
Jim F HuggettMolecular and Cell Biology, LGC, Queens Road, Teddington, TW11 0LY, UK. jim.huggett@lgcgroup.com.
Tübitak National Metrology Institute · TREuropean Commission · BENational Institute of Biology · SILancet Laboratories · ZAOllscoil na Gaillimhe – University of Galway · IESan Raffaele University of Rome · ITStellenbosch University · ZAThe Royal Free Hospital · GBGreat Ormond Street Hospital for Children NHS Foundation Trust · GBResearch Center Borstel - Leibniz Lung Center · DEUniversity College London · GBUniversity of Surrey · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundReal-time PCR (qPCR) based methods, such as the Xpert MTB/RIF, are increasingly being used to diagnose tuberculosis (TB). While qualitative methods are adequate for diagnosis, the therapeutic monitoring of TB patients requires quantitative methods currently performed using smear microscopy. The potential use of quantitative molecular measurements for therapeutic monitoring has been investigated but findings have been variable and inconclusive. The lack of an adequate reference method and reference materials is a barrier to understanding the source of such disagreement. Digital PCR (dPCR) offers the potential for an accurate method for quantification of specific DNA sequences in reference materials which can be used to evaluate quantitative molecular methods for TB treatment monitoring.

methodsTo assess a novel approach for the development of quality assurance materials we used dPCR to quantify specific DNA sequences in a range of prototype reference materials and evaluated accuracy between different laboratories and instruments. The materials were then also used to evaluate the quantitative performance of qPCR and Xpert MTB/RIF in eight clinical testing laboratories.

resultsdPCR was found to provide results in good agreement with the other methods tested and to be highly reproducible between laboratories without calibration even when using different instruments. When the reference materials were analysed with qPCR and Xpert MTB/RIF by clinical laboratories, all laboratories were able to correctly rank the reference materials according to concentration, however there was a marked difference in the measured magnitude.

conclusionsTB is a disease where the quantification of the pathogen could lead to better patient management and qPCR methods offer the potential to rapidly perform such analysis. However, our findings suggest that when precisely characterised materials are used to evaluate qPCR methods, the measurement result variation is too high to determine whether molecular quantification of Mycobacterium tuberculosis would provide a clinically useful readout. The methods described in this study provide a means by which the technical performance of quantitative molecular methods can be evaluated independently of clinical variability to improve accuracy of measurement results. These will assist in ultimately increasing the likelihood that such approaches could be used to improve patient management of TB.

Indexed as

AdultDNA, BacterialFemaleHumansMaleMicroscopyMolecular Diagnostic TechniquesMycobacterium tuberculosisPathology, MolecularReal-Time Polymerase Chain ReactionSensitivity and SpecificityTuberculosis, PulmonaryDNA, BacterialDiagnosticsDigital PCRMycobacterium tuberculosis

Identifiers

PMID27487852
PMCPMC4971652
OpenAlexW2495918849

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.