Factors Contributing to Variability of Quantitative Viral PCR Results in Proficiency Testing Samples: a Multivariate Analysis
-
- R. T. Hayden
- Department of Pathology, St. Jude Children's Research Hospital, Memphis, Tennessee, USA
-
- X. Yan
- Center for Health Research, Geisinger Health System, Danville, Pennsylvania, USA
-
- M. T. Wick
- College of American Pathologists, Northfield, Illinois, USA
-
- A. B. Rodriguez
- Department of Pathology, St. Jude Children's Research Hospital, Memphis, Tennessee, USA
-
- X. Xiong
- Department of Biostatistics, St. Jude Children's Research Hospital, Memphis, Tennessee, USA
-
- C. C. Ginocchio
- Division of Infectious Disease Diagnostics, Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, North Shore-LIJ Health System Laboratories, Lake Success, New York, USA
-
- M. J. Mitchell
- Department of Pathology, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, Massachusetts, USA
-
- A. M. Caliendo
- Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia, USA
書誌事項
- 公開日
- 2012-02
- 権利情報
-
- https://journals.asm.org/non-commercial-tdm-license
- DOI
-
- 10.1128/jcm.01287-11
- 公開者
- American Society for Microbiology
この論文をさがす
説明
<jats:title>ABSTRACT</jats:title> <jats:p>While viral load testing has gained widespread acceptance, a primary limitation remains the variability of results, particularly between different laboratories. While some work has demonstrated the importance of standardized quantitative control material in reducing this variability, little has been done to explore other important factors in the molecular amplification process. Results of 185 laboratories enrolled in the College of American Pathologists (CAP) 2009 viral load proficiency testing (PT) survey (VLS) were examined. This included 165 labs (89.2%) testing for cytomegalovirus (CMV), 99 (53.5%) for Epstein-Barr virus (EBV), and 64 (34.6%) for BK virus (BKV). At the time of PT, laboratories were asked a series of questions to characterize their testing methods. The responses to these questions were correlated to mean viral load (MVL) and result variability (RV). Contribution of individual factors to RV was estimated through analysis of variance (ANOVA) modeling and the use of backward selection of factors to fit those models. Selection of the quantitative calibrator, commercially prepared primers and probes, and amplification target gene were found most prominently associated with changes in MVL or RV for one or more of the viruses studied. Commercially prepared primers and probes and amplification target gene made the largest contribution to overall variability. Factors contributing to MVL and RV differed among viruses, as did relative contribution of each factor to overall variability. The marked variability seen in clinical quantitative viral load results is associated with multiple aspects of molecular testing design and performance. The reduction of such variability will require a multifaceted approach to improve the accuracy, reliability, and clinical utility of these important tests.</jats:p>
収録刊行物
-
- Journal of Clinical Microbiology
-
Journal of Clinical Microbiology 50 (2), 337-345, 2012-02
American Society for Microbiology