Ming-Lun Yeh1, Chung-Feng Huang2, Ming-Yen Hsieh3, Jee-Fu Huang4, Chia-Yen Dai5, Ming-Lung Yu6, Wan-Long Chuang7. 1. Division of Hepatobiliary, Department of Internal Medicine, Kaohsiung Medical University Chung-Ho Memorial Hospital, Kaohsiung, Taiwan; Graduate Institute of Medicine, College of Medicine, Kaohsiung Medical University, Kaohsiung, Taiwan; Hepatitis Center, Kaohsiung Medical University Chung-Ho Memorial Hospital, Kaohsiung Medical University, Kaohsiung, Taiwan. 2. Division of Hepatobiliary, Department of Internal Medicine, Kaohsiung Medical University Chung-Ho Memorial Hospital, Kaohsiung, Taiwan; Faculty of Internal Medicine, College of Medicine, Kaohsiung Medical University, Kaohsiung, Taiwan; Department of Occupational Medicine, Kaohsiung Municipal Ta-Tung Hospital, Kaohsiung Medical University, Kaohsiung, Taiwan. 3. Department of Internal Medicine, Kaohsiung Municipal Ta-Tung Hospital, Kaohsiung Medical University, Kaohsiung, Taiwan. 4. Division of Hepatobiliary, Department of Internal Medicine, Kaohsiung Medical University Chung-Ho Memorial Hospital, Kaohsiung, Taiwan; Faculty of Internal Medicine, College of Medicine, Kaohsiung Medical University, Kaohsiung, Taiwan; Department of Internal Medicine, Kaohsiung Municipal Hsiao-Kang Hospital, Kaohsiung Medical University, Kaohsiung, Taiwan. 5. Division of Hepatobiliary, Department of Internal Medicine, Kaohsiung Medical University Chung-Ho Memorial Hospital, Kaohsiung, Taiwan; Graduate Institute of Medicine, College of Medicine, Kaohsiung Medical University, Kaohsiung, Taiwan; Faculty of Internal Medicine, College of Medicine, Kaohsiung Medical University, Kaohsiung, Taiwan; Hepatitis Center, Kaohsiung Medical University Chung-Ho Memorial Hospital, Kaohsiung Medical University, Kaohsiung, Taiwan. 6. Division of Hepatobiliary, Department of Internal Medicine, Kaohsiung Medical University Chung-Ho Memorial Hospital, Kaohsiung, Taiwan; Faculty of Internal Medicine, College of Medicine, Kaohsiung Medical University, Kaohsiung, Taiwan. Electronic address: fish6069@gmail.com. 7. Division of Hepatobiliary, Department of Internal Medicine, Kaohsiung Medical University Chung-Ho Memorial Hospital, Kaohsiung, Taiwan; Faculty of Internal Medicine, College of Medicine, Kaohsiung Medical University, Kaohsiung, Taiwan; Hepatitis Center, Kaohsiung Medical University Chung-Ho Memorial Hospital, Kaohsiung Medical University, Kaohsiung, Taiwan.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Measurement of hepatitis B virus (HBV) DNA levels is essential in the clinical management of patients with chronic HBV infection. Performance and accuracy of quantitation for HBV DNA are therefore critical in clinical practice. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to compare and evaluate the performance characteristics of two HBV DNA quantitative assays: Abbott RealTime HBV (RealTime assay) and Cobas AmpliPrep/Cobas TaqMan HBV assays 2.0 (TaqMan assay). STUDY DESIGN: Serum samples from 220 HBV-infected patients were collected. Performance characteristics of the HBV DNA quantitative assays, including sensitivity, linearity, and reproducibility were measured. The assays were compared based on the viral status, including HBeAg, genotype, core promoter and pre-core region mutations. RESULTS: The RealTime assay had a sensitivity and specificity of 98.2% and 100%, respectively. The intra-assay coefficients of variation of serum samples ranged from 0.00% to 11.25% for the RealTime assay and 1.22% to 8.22% for TaqMan assay. Paired quantitative results showed excellent correlation by linear regression analysis (R(2)=0.961), good level of agreement with a mean difference of 0.31log10IU/mL, and limits of agreement of -0.62 to 1.24log10IU/mL, irrespective of HBeAg, genotype, core promoter and pre-core region mutation-specific differences. In this study, a difference of ≥1log10IU/mL between the two assays was observed in 8.6% of the samples. Genotype B and average HBV DNA levels of <3log10IU/mL were significant associated factors of this discordance. CONCLUSIONS: The Abbott assay delivered high performance for HBV DNA quantification and correlated extremely well with the TaqMan assay, irrespective of viral status.
BACKGROUND: Measurement of hepatitis B virus (HBV) DNA levels is essential in the clinical management of patients with chronic HBV infection. Performance and accuracy of quantitation for HBV DNA are therefore critical in clinical practice. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to compare and evaluate the performance characteristics of two HBV DNA quantitative assays: Abbott RealTime HBV (RealTime assay) and Cobas AmpliPrep/Cobas TaqMan HBV assays 2.0 (TaqMan assay). STUDY DESIGN: Serum samples from 220 HBV-infectedpatients were collected. Performance characteristics of the HBV DNA quantitative assays, including sensitivity, linearity, and reproducibility were measured. The assays were compared based on the viral status, including HBeAg, genotype, core promoter and pre-core region mutations. RESULTS: The RealTime assay had a sensitivity and specificity of 98.2% and 100%, respectively. The intra-assay coefficients of variation of serum samples ranged from 0.00% to 11.25% for the RealTime assay and 1.22% to 8.22% for TaqMan assay. Paired quantitative results showed excellent correlation by linear regression analysis (R(2)=0.961), good level of agreement with a mean difference of 0.31log10IU/mL, and limits of agreement of -0.62 to 1.24log10IU/mL, irrespective of HBeAg, genotype, core promoter and pre-core region mutation-specific differences. In this study, a difference of ≥1log10IU/mL between the two assays was observed in 8.6% of the samples. Genotype B and average HBV DNA levels of <3log10IU/mL were significant associated factors of this discordance. CONCLUSIONS: The Abbott assay delivered high performance for HBV DNA quantification and correlated extremely well with the TaqMan assay, irrespective of viral status.
Authors: Bin Wu; Feng Xiao; Peiwen Li; Yan Du; Jinqiong Lin; Kaihua Ming; Bin Chen; Xiuxia Lei; Banglao Xu; Dayu Liu Journal: PLoS One Date: 2017-02-09 Impact factor: 3.240