ArticleJapanese journal of ophthalmology2026
Clinical performance of the multiplex solid-phase "Direct Strip PCR" for infectious uveitis: a multicenter diagnostic accuracy study.
Article in Japanese journal of ophthalmology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
64 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate the clinical performance of "Direct Strip PCR," a multiplex solid-phase real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR) kit, for diagnosing infectious uveitis. STUDY
designMulticenter, prospective, diagnostic accuracy study
methodsWe analyzed 475 ocular-fluid samples (336 aqueous humor and 139 vitreous fluid) from 29 sites in Japan. Direct Strip PCR, an IVD-grade multiplex real-time PCR kit targeting HSV-1, HSV-2, VZV, EBV, CMV, HHV-6, HTLV-1, Toxoplasma gondii, and Treponema pallidum requiring no DNA extraction and incorporating internal controls, was compared with quantitative PCR (qPCR) for concordance and DNA copy-number correlation.
resultsAll 9 of the target pathogens were detected. Direct Strip PCR showed excellent agreement with qPCR, with percent positive agreement (PPA), percent negative agreement (PNA), and percent overall agreement (POA) in aqueous humor of 98.0%, 99.2%, and 98.5%, respectively, and in vitreous fluid of 95.7%, 97.1%, and 96.4%, respectively, indicating high concordance for positive and negative results. All the values exceeded predefined 90% thresholds agreed upon with the Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices Agency, meeting the required performance criteria. Discordant results were infrequent (10/4275 targets) and involved low-copy samples near the detection limit. The DNA copy numbers correlated strongly between the methods (r = 0.948-0.996). No adverse events were reported.
conclusionDirect Strip PCR demonstrated high concordance with qPCR, reliably detected major pathogens of infectious uveitis, and yielded quantitative results that correlated with the qPCR results, supporting disease monitoring. Its solid-phase, extraction-free, and per-run calibration-free format provides a practical basis for regulatory submissions and global dissemination of multiplex PCR.
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.