ArticleAnnals of laboratory medicine2017
Performance of the Real-Q EBV Quantification Kit for Epstein-Barr Virus DNA Quantification in Whole Blood.
Article in Annals of laboratory medicine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Epstein-Barr virus dynamics and its prognostic impact on nasopharyngeal cancers in a non-endemic region.Ecancermedicalscience · 2022Article
- IL-37 Was Involved in Progress of Acute Myeloid Leukemia Through Regulating IL-6 Expression.Cancer management and research · 2021Article
- Performance Evaluation of the Beckman Coulter DxN VERIS Hepatitis B Virus (HBV) Assay in Comparison With the Abbott RealTime HBV Assay.Annals of laboratory medicine · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
There has been increasing interest in standardized and quantitative Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) DNA testing for the management of EBV disease. We evaluated the performance of the Real-Q EBV Quantification Kit (BioSewoom, Korea) in whole blood (WB). Nucleic acid extraction and real-time PCR were performed by using the MagNA Pure 96 (Roche Diagnostics, Germany) and 7500 Fast real-time PCR system (Applied Biosystems, USA), respectively. Assay sensitivity, linearity, and conversion factor were determined by using the World Health Organization international standard diluted in EBV-negative WB. We used 81 WB clinical specimens to compare performance of the Real-Q EBV Quantification Kit and artus EBV RG PCR Kit (Qiagen, Germany). The limit of detection (LOD) and limit of quantification (LOQ) for the Real-Q kit were 453 and 750 IU/mL, respectively. The conversion factor from EBV genomic copies to IU was 0.62. The linear range of the assay was from 750 to 10⁶ IU/mL. Viral load values measured with the Real-Q assay were on average 0.54 log₁₀ copies/mL higher than those measured with the artus assay. The Real-Q assay offered good analytical performance for EBV DNA quantification in WB.
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.