AIMS: To evaluate the performance characteristics and clinical usefulness of the COBAS Amplicor HBV monitor (COBAS-AM) test in Taiwan and to examine its correlation with the Quantiplex branched DNA signal amplification (bDNA) assay for measuring serum hepatitis B virus (HBV) DNA concentrations. METHODS: HBV DNA was measured by the COBAS-AM test in 149 sera from chronic HBV infected patients that had previously been analysed by the bDNA assay. RESULTS: The COBAS-AM test showed good reproducibility, with acceptable intra-assay and interassay coefficients of variation (1.6% and 0.9%, respectively) and good linearity (r2=0.98). The overall sensitivity of the COBAS-AM test was significantly higher than that of the bDNA assay (95.3% v 83.2%): 69.6% of samples with HBV DNA below the detection limit of the bDNA assay could be measured by the COBAS-AM test. There was a significant correlation between the results of the two assays (r=0.901; p<0.0001). On average, the results derived from the COBAS-AM test were 0.55 log lower than those of the bDNA assay. HBV DNA concentrations were significantly higher among HBV e antigen (HBeAg) positive patients than negative ones, and higher among patients with abnormal alanine aminotransferase (ALT) concentrations than those with normal ALT concentrations (p=0.0003). CONCLUSIONS: The COBAS-AM assay, more sensitive in HBeAg negative samples than the bDNA assay, can effectively measure HBV DNA concentrations in Taiwanese patients. HBV DNA values measured by the COBAS-AM test and bDNA assay correlate significantly.
AIMS: To evaluate the performance characteristics and clinical usefulness of the COBAS Amplicor HBV monitor (COBAS-AM) test in Taiwan and to examine its correlation with the Quantiplex branched DNA signal amplification (bDNA) assay for measuring serum hepatitis B virus (HBV) DNA concentrations. METHODS:HBV DNA was measured by the COBAS-AM test in 149 sera from chronic HBV infectedpatients that had previously been analysed by the bDNA assay. RESULTS: The COBAS-AM test showed good reproducibility, with acceptable intra-assay and interassay coefficients of variation (1.6% and 0.9%, respectively) and good linearity (r2=0.98). The overall sensitivity of the COBAS-AM test was significantly higher than that of the bDNA assay (95.3% v 83.2%): 69.6% of samples with HBV DNA below the detection limit of the bDNA assay could be measured by the COBAS-AM test. There was a significant correlation between the results of the two assays (r=0.901; p<0.0001). On average, the results derived from the COBAS-AM test were 0.55 log lower than those of the bDNA assay. HBV DNA concentrations were significantly higher among HBV e antigen (HBeAg) positive patients than negative ones, and higher among patients with abnormal alanine aminotransferase (ALT) concentrations than those with normal ALT concentrations (p=0.0003). CONCLUSIONS: The COBAS-AM assay, more sensitive in HBeAg negative samples than the bDNA assay, can effectively measure HBV DNA concentrations in Taiwanese patients. HBV DNA values measured by the COBAS-AM test and bDNA assay correlate significantly.
Authors: D A Hendricks; B J Stowe; B S Hoo; J Kolberg; B D Irvine; P D Neuwald; M S Urdea; R P Perrillo Journal: Am J Clin Pathol Date: 1995-11 Impact factor: 2.493