ArticlePloS one2017
Comparison of quantitative real-time PCR and direct immunofluorescence for the detection of Pneumocystis jirovecii.
Article in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 31 citations in OpenAlex.
- The prevalence of laboratory-confirmed Pneumocystis jirovecii in HIV-infected adults in Africa: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Medical mycology · 2021Pooled it
- Evaluation of the ELITe InGenius PCR assay compared with immunofluorescence for Pneumocystis jirovecii detection in respiratory samples.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2026Article
- Diagnosis ofInfection & chemotherapy · 2025Review
- The Clinical Value of Metagenomic Next-Generation Sequencing inInfection and drug resistance · 2024Article
- Article
- Performance of a Real Time PCR forJournal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Is It Possible to DifferentiateJournal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Case Report: Diagnostic Value of Metagenomics Next Generation Sequencing in Intracranial Infection Caused by Mucor.Frontiers in medicine · 2021Article
- Triplex Hybridization-Based Nanosystem for the Rapid Screening of Pneumocystis Pneumonia in Clinical Samples.Journal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Article
- Is real time PCR preferable to the direct immunofluorescence in the diagnosis of Pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia in HIV-infected patients?BMC research notes · 2020Article
- Performance of real-time PCR and immunofluorescence assay for diagnosis of Pneumocystis pneumonia in real-world clinical practice.PloS one · 2020Article
- Article
- Non-culture based assays for the detection of fungal pathogens.Journal de mycologie medicale · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPneumocystis pneumonia (PCP) is a serious risk for HIV-positive patients. Asymptomatic infection or colonisation with P. jirovecii has been shown to occur frequently. PCR assays frequently identify such cases, due to their high sensitivity. Quantitative real-time PCR (qPCR) gene copy number cut-off values have been suggested to differentiate colonisation and infection; these need to be standardised for routine use. We compared the results of qPCR with an immunofluorescence assay (IFA) to determine a specific cut-off value.
methodsFrom March 2005 through June 2009, induced sputum specimens were collected from adult patients who were clinically suspected of having PCP, at the Chris Hani Baragwanath Hospital in Gauteng, South Africa. Laboratory diagnosis of PCP was done by a conventional direct IFA and a qPCR assay. A receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis was performed to determine a suitable copy number cut-off value.
resultsP. jirovecii was identified in 51% (156/305) and 67% (204/305) of specimens using IFA and qPCR, respectively. The cut-off value for the qPCR that best predicted the IFA results was 78 copies/5 μl (area under ROC curve 0.92). The sensitivity and specificity of qPCR using this cut-off was 94.6% and 89.1%, respectively, compared with the IFA. DISCUSSION: The results of the ROC curve analysis indicate an excellent predictive value of the qPCR using the proposed cut-off. However, the IFA test is an imperfect gold standard and so this cut-off should not be used in isolation; clinical data should also contribute to the interpretation of the qPCR result.
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.