Differences between the quantitative antigenemia assay and the cobas amplicor monitor quantitative PCR assay for detecting CMV viraemia in bone marrow and solid organ transplant patients
- 31 May 2001
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Wiley in Journal of Medical Virology
- Vol. 64 (3) , 275-282
- https://doi.org/10.1002/jmv.1047
Abstract
The relationship between quantitative PCR (COBAS Amplicor CMV Monitor, Roche Diagnostics) and quantitative antigenemia (Monofluor pp65, Sanofi Diagnostics) was examined for monitoring CMV viraemia. A total of 469 specimens from immunocompromised haematology and solid organ transplant patients were tested by quantitative antigenemia and qualitative PCR. Quantitative PCR (QPCR) was performed on the 245 specimens in which CMV DNA was detected by qualitative PCR. To exclude any effect due to specific anti‐CMV treatment, analysis of antigenemia and QPCR results was only performed on the 164 of 245 specimens collected from patients not on ganciclovir or foscarnet treatment. Forty seven specimens had 5 leucocytes) and had 5 leucocytes (SEM = 3). In the corresponding solid organ transplant group, the correlation coefficient for antigen and QPCR results was 0.71 with an average CMV viral load of 9,900 copies/mL (SEM = 2,100) and an average antigen of 26 positive CMV cells/2 × 105 leucocytes (SEM = 6). Both the average viral load and the average antigen result in specimens from solid organ transplant patients, were significantly higher than the average viral load and antigen result in the corresponding group of bone marrow transplant patients (Two‐Sample‐for‐Means z‐Test, P = 0.001 and P = 0.003, respectively). The differences in the kinetics of the two assays in monitoring CMV and their ability to predict CMV disease was also assessed in a sub‐group of patients. In conclusion, the two assays used in this study do not always show parallel changes in CMV viral load, but may be complementary for the diagnosis and management of CMV disease. The observation that non‐neutropenic patients can have a high viral load in plasma and a negative antigenemia has implications for laboratories using antigenemia alone to monitor patients for CMV disease. J. Med. Virol. 64:275–282, 2001.Keywords
This publication has 14 references indexed in Scilit:
- Comparison of Quantitative Cytomegalovirus (CMV) PCR in Plasma and CMV Antigenemia Assay: Clinical Utility of the Prototype AMPLICOR CMV MONITOR Test in Transplant RecipientsJournal of Clinical Microbiology, 2000
- Quantitative Effects of Valacyclovir on the Replication of Cytomegalovirus (CMV) in Persons with Advanced Human Immunodeficiency Virus Disease: Baseline CMV Load Dictates Time to Disease and SurvivalThe Journal of Infectious Diseases, 1999
- Determination of cytomegalovirus DNA load for monitoring of cytomegalovirus disease and antiviral treatment in solid organ transplant patients, comparing limiting-dilution PCR and hybrid capture assay with cytomegalovirus isolationClinical Microbiology & Infection, 1999
- Quantitation of human cytomegalovirus DNA in peripheral blood leukocytes of heart transplant recipients: relationship with pp65 antigenernia and with antiviral therapyClinical Microbiology & Infection, 1999
- Quantitation of Cytomegalovirus: Methodologic Aspects and Clinical ApplicationsClinical Microbiology Reviews, 1998
- Interrelationships among Quantity of Human Cytomegalovirus (HCMV) DNA in Blood, Donor‐Recipient Serostatus, and Administration of Methylprednisolone as Risk Factors for HCMV Disease following Liver TransplantationThe Journal of Infectious Diseases, 1997
- Viral complications after transplantationJournal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy, 1995
- Risk factors for cytomegalovirus and severe bacterial infections following liver transplantation: a prospective multivariate time-dependent analysisJournal of Hepatology, 1993
- Detection of Cytomegalovirus in Urine from Newborns by Using Polymerase Chain Reaction DNA AmplificationThe Journal of Infectious Diseases, 1988
- SYMPTOMATIC CYTOMEGALOVIRUS INFECTION IN SEROPOSITIVE KIDNEY RECIPIENTS: REINFECTION WITH DONOR VIRUS RATHER THAN REACTIVATION OF RECIPIENT VIRUSThe Lancet, 1988