Trial reportScientific reports2024
Clinical trial and performance evaluation of the Wantai HBsAg (CMIA) diagnostic kit for screening blood donors in China.
Trial report in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Detection technology and clinical applications of serum viral products of hepatitis B virus infection.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
In China, according to the 'Technical Operating Procedures for Blood Stations (2019 Edition),' blood stations are authorized to utilize Chemiluminescence Immunoassay (CLIA) to detect pathogen markers linked with transfusion-transmissible infections. However, currently, there is no approved CLIA reagent for the screening of blood-borne diseases in China, specifically for the detection of Hepatitis B surface antigen. The objective of this research project is to conduct a comprehensive evaluation of the performance of the Wantai Chemiluminescent Microparticle Hepatitis B surface antigen reagent. This study evaluates the performance of the Wantai Chemiluminescent Microparticle Immunoassay (CMIA) on the Wan200 + analyzer in screening for Hepatitis B Surface Antigen (HBsAg) in blood samples. The clinical trial component of this evaluation is included as part of the documentation submitted to the National Medical Products Administration (NMPA) of China for the approval of blood screening reagents. The evaluation plan of this study encompasses two main components: clinical trials and performance assessment. We adopted a controlled trial design, utilizing the WanTai Chemiluminescent Microparticle Immunoassay (CMIA) on the Wan200 + analyzer and the Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay (ELISA) to screen for Hepatitis B Surface Antigen (HBsAg) in routine blood donor samples and reference serum panel samples. To ensure the accuracy of the screening, we additionally employed Abbott's ELISA reagents and HBV DNA for validation. The assessment primarily focused on key performance indicators such as sensitivity, specificity, and analytical sensitivity. Moreover, this clinical trial data has been included as part of the submission to China's National Medical Products Administration (NMPA). In the clinical trials of this study, a total of 10,470 blood donor samples underwent simultaneous testing using both CMIA and ELISA methods. Across two clinical trials, there was remarkable concordance between CMIA and the two ELISA reagents, with Kappa values exceeding 0.82. Among the 269 samples that were double-reactive in the enzyme immunoassay (ELISA) tests, CMIA exhibited a 100% reactivity detection rate. However, CMIA produced 14 and 6 false-positive results in the respective clinical trials, resulting in specificities of 99.73% and 99.89%. In contrast, the specificities for Wantai ELISA and Xin Chuang ELISA were both greater than 99.94%.When testing samples in the gray zone serum plates, CMIA's detection limit significantly exceeded that of the two ELISA assays. CMIA had a detection cutoff of 0.05 IU/mL, while the two ELISA reagents had cutoffs of 0.1 IU/mL and 0.09 IU/mL, respectively. CMIA's detection limits for the adr and adw subtypes were 0.05 IU/mL, and for the ay subtype, it was 0.1 U/mL. The detection limit for 10 HBV mutant samples was 0.5 U/mL. In 165 cases where ELISA tested negative but HBV DNA tested positive, CMIA detected 5 HBsAg-positive samples. This study evaluated the performance of the Wantai CMIA in screening for HBsAg among blood donors. The results demonstrate outstanding performance of CMIA in both clinical trials and performance assessments, detecting all true positive samples with a sensitivity of 100%. It exhibits excellent concordance with the two ELISA assays. Of particular note is its superiority in early detection of HBsAg in the screening of early-stage hepatitis B infections, reducing the window period compared to ELISA. CMIA achieves a specificity exceeding 99.73% for negative blood donors, aligning with the European Union's standards for blood screening assay specificity. In summary, Wantai's CMIA displays high sensitivity and specificity in blood donor screening, making it suitable for screening blood donors in China.
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.