Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26424842›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology2015

Comparative Evaluation of Three Nucleic Acid-Based Assays for BK Virus Quantification.

Veronique Descamps, Elodie Martin, Virginie Morel, Catherine François, François Helle, Gilles Duverlie, Sandrine Castelain, Etienne Brochot

Open access · bronzeAbstract readComparative StudyEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical microbiology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 26% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Consensus Definitions of BK Polyomavirus Nephropathy in Renal Transplant Recipients for Clinical Trials.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2022
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Veronique DescampsDepartment of Virology, Amiens University Medical Center, Amiens, France; Virology Research Unit, EA 4294, Jules Verne University of Picardie, Amiens, France.
Elodie MartinDepartment of Virology, Amiens University Medical Center, Amiens, France; Virology Research Unit, EA 4294, Jules Verne University of Picardie, Amiens, France.
Virginie MorelDepartment of Virology, Amiens University Medical Center, Amiens, France; Virology Research Unit, EA 4294, Jules Verne University of Picardie, Amiens, France.
Catherine FrançoisDepartment of Virology, Amiens University Medical Center, Amiens, France; Virology Research Unit, EA 4294, Jules Verne University of Picardie, Amiens, France.
François HelleDepartment of Virology, Amiens University Medical Center, Amiens, France; Virology Research Unit, EA 4294, Jules Verne University of Picardie, Amiens, France.
Gilles DuverlieDepartment of Virology, Amiens University Medical Center, Amiens, France; Virology Research Unit, EA 4294, Jules Verne University of Picardie, Amiens, France.
Sandrine CastelainDepartment of Virology, Amiens University Medical Center, Amiens, France; Virology Research Unit, EA 4294, Jules Verne University of Picardie, Amiens, France.
Etienne BrochotDepartment of Virology, Amiens University Medical Center, Amiens, France; Virology Research Unit, EA 4294, Jules Verne University of Picardie, Amiens, France etienne.brochot@u-picardie.fr.
Université de Picardie Jules Verne · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

With the growing importance of BK virus (BKV), effective and efficient screening for BKV replication in plasma and urine samples is very important for monitoring renal transplant and hematopoietic stem cell transplant recipients, who are at increased risk of BKV-associated diseases. However, recent assays proposed by many manufacturers have not been tested, and the available tests have not been standardized. The aim of the present study was to evaluate and compare the performances of three commercially available kits, R-gene, GeneProof, and RealStar, on plasma and urine specimens from patients infected with various genotypes and to determine the correlations with the results from a reference laboratory. A qualitatively excellent global agreement (96.8%) was obtained. RealStar PCR tended to give a higher sensitivity, especially for subtype Ib1 samples. Comparison of 30 plasma samples and 53 urine samples showed a good agreement between the three assays, with Spearman's Rho correlation coefficient values falling between 0.92 and 0.98 (P < 0.001). Moreover, a perfect correlation was obtained for comparison of the assay performances with the AcroMetrix BKV panel (P < 0.001 for all comparisons). According to Bland-Altman analysis, more than 95% (240/249 comparisons) of sample comparisons were situated in the range of the mean ± 2 standard deviations (SD). The greatest variability between assays was observed for 10.2% of subtype Ib2 samples, with differences of >1 log10 copies/ml. In conclusion, this study demonstrated the reliable and comparable performances of the R-gene, GeneProof, and RealStar real-time PCR systems for quantification of BKV in urine and plasma samples. All three real-time PCR assays are appropriate for screening of BKV replication in patients.

Indexed as

AdultAgedBK VirusFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedMolecular Diagnostic TechniquesPlasmaPolyomavirus InfectionsUrineViral Load

Identifiers

PMID26424842
PMCPMC4652087
OpenAlexW2173308240

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 Socratic graph.