Literature DB >> 31432647

Relationship of Circulating Cytomegalovirus Levels Obtained Through Antigenemia Testing and Quantitative PCR Differs Between Children and Adults.

Sooin Choi1, Yae Jean Kim2, Keon Hee Yoo2, Ki Woong Sung2, Hong Hoe Koo2, Suk Jin Kim3, Jun Ho Jang3, Kihyun Kim3, Chul Won Jung3, Hee Jae Huh4, Eun Suk Kang5.   

Abstract

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2020        PMID: 31432647      PMCID: PMC6713664          DOI: 10.3343/alm.2020.40.1.88

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Lab Med        ISSN: 2234-3806            Impact factor:   3.464


× No keyword cloud information.
Dear Editor, Cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection is a major complication in patients who undergo hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT); thus, surveillance of CMV infection or reactivation is widely performed to prevent disease progression. Although the CMV antigenemia test has long been used for CMV detection [1], it has several limitations such as a requirement for fresh blood samples, subjective interpretation, and reduced feasibility in neutropenic patients [2]. Recently, CMV quantitative (Q)-PCR has emerged as an alternative to antigenemia testing [3]. Nevertheless, there is no universal threshold of circulating DNA values for initiating antiviral therapy in HSCT patients. In addition, the DNA values used to reflect the clinical course may vary among patients because of different therapeutic interventions and age effects. This is the first report to evaluate the relationship of the results of the CMV antigenemia testing and Q-PCR in different age groups of patients undergoing HSCT and to show the impact of age on this relationship. Our results may be useful to establish appropriate threshold values for pediatric and adult patients in similar clinical conditions. The antigenemia testing (CINA Kit system, Argene Biosoft, Varilhes, France) and Q-PCR (Real-Q CMV DNA quantification kit, BioSewoom, Seoul, Korea) using EDTA-treated whole blood derived DNA (MagNa Pure 96 DNA and Viral NA small volume kit, Roche, Manheim, Germany) were performed simultaneously in HSCT patients to monitor CMV infection at Samsung Medical Center, Seoul, Korea, from June 2016 to December 2017. Retrospective data (2,474 results) were collected from 75 children and 173 adults. The DNA value was generated in standardized units of IU/mL. This study was approved by the Institutional Review Board of Samsung Medical Center (IRB No. SMC 2018-04-056-001), and informed consent was waived. The relationship between the results of the antigenemia testing and Q-PCR was analyzed by Deming regression analysis; P<0.05 was considered statistically significant. After excluding DNA values outside the linear range or without associated CMV antigenemia results, 516 results were included. The threshold DNA values corresponding to multiple CMV antigenemia values that are considered significant for a clinical decision at our institute were calculated. Youden index were determined through ROC curve analysis after excluding the upper 5% and lower 5% of DNA values, using SAS version 9.4 (SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC, USA). The linear regression curves were analyzed using 516 results with significantly different intercepts in the child and adult groups (P=0.02, Fig. 1). The predicted threshold values of CMV DNA that corresponded to clinically significant CMV antigenemia levels of 1, 5, 10, 15, 20, and 25 positive cells/2×105 white blood cells (WBCs) were 158, 316, 316, 1,122, 1,413, and 1,413 IU/mL in children, and 158, 1,995, 2,512, 4,467, 4,467, and 6,310 IU/mL in adults, respectively. The proposed optimal thresholds of DNA values and their ability to predict the corresponding CMV antigenemia levels are presented in Table 1.
Fig. 1

Relationship between the CMV antigenemia and CMV DNA Q-PCR results in (A) total subjects, (B) children, and (C) adults as determined by Deming regression analysis. The linear regression curves (solid line) showed significantly different intercepts between children and adults (P=0.02). The dashed line represents the 95% confidence intervals.

Abbreviations: CMV, cytomegalovirus; Q-PCR, quantitative PCR; WBC, white blood cell.

Table 1

Performance of predicted optimal threshold values of CMV DNA measured by quantitative PCR corresponding to each value of CMV antigenemia in children and adult

Patient groupPatients, N (Results, N)Median age, year (IQR)CMV antigenemia (/2 × 105 WBCs)Optimal CMV DNA threshold (IU/mL)*Sensitivity (%) (95% CI)Specificity (%) (95% CI)
Children ( < 18 years)75 (746)8 (5–12)115085.8 (79.6–90.4)84.4 (81.3–87.1)
530098.6 (92.5–99.8)82.6 (79.6–85.3)
1030097.7 (87.9–99.6)79.2 (76.1–82.1)
151,10090.0 (74.4–96.5)89.8 (87.4–91.8)
201,40092.0 (75.0–97.8)91.0 (88.7–92.9)
251,40091.3 (73.2–97.6)90.7 (88.4–92.6)
Adults ( ≥ 18 years)173 (1,728)48 (36–57)115092.9 (89.8–95.1)84.2 (82.2–86.1)
52,00095.6 (91.8–97.7)91.7 (90.2–93.0)
102,50098.7 (95.2–99.6)91.0 (89.4–92.3)
154,50096.7 (91.9–98.7)92.9 (91.5–94.1)
204,50098.0 (93.1–99.5)91.9 (90.5–93.1)
256,30097.9 (92.7–99.4)93.6 (92.3–94.7)

*Estimated Youden Index through ROC curve analysis.

Abbreviations: CMV, cytomegalovirus; IQR, interquartile range; WBC, white blood cells; CI, confidence interval.

Children and adults tend to differ significantly in physiology, metabolic state, physical size, body fluid compartments, and immune responses [4]. Thus, CMV replication kinetics evaluated by different targets (i.e., DNA or antigens) are likely to also differ according to age. Compared with adults, we found that children have significantly lower DNA values over a wide range of CMV antigenemia levels, including clinically significant levels. Several studies have suggested various threshold DNA values for clinical decision-making depending on the sample used (whole blood [5810], plasma [36], and cells [9]) and type of transplant (HSCT [678910] and solid organ transplantation (SOT) [367]). SOT recipients tended to have higher DNA values than HSCT recipients [67]. Boaretti, et al. [1] suggested 2,275 IU/mL as the threshold DNA value comparable to a CMV antigenemia level of 20 positive cells/2×105 WBCs, which differs strikingly from the 4,467 IU/mL threshold we determined. This difference could be due to variations in the sample type (plasma vs whole blood) or clinical conditions (SOT vs HSCT). These issues need to be further validated by standardization of the sample type for CMV Q-PCR analysis in different patient groups, and eventually by correlation with clinical course or outcome. In conclusion, we found that relationships of CMV Q-PCR and CMV antigenemia test results differ significantly between children and adults who have undergone HSCT. Thus, threshold DNA values might need to be adjusted according to patient characteristics, to optimize anti-CMV therapeutic efficacy and improve the clinical outcome.
  10 in total

1.  Comparison of quantitative cytomegalovirus (CMV) PCR in plasma and CMV antigenemia assay: clinical utility of the prototype AMPLICOR CMV MONITOR test in transplant recipients.

Authors:  A M Caliendo; K St George; S Y Kao; J Allega; B H Tan; R LaFontaine; L Bui; C R Rinaldo
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2000-06       Impact factor: 5.948

2.  Validation of clinical application of cytomegalovirus plasma DNA load measurement and definition of treatment criteria by analysis of correlation to antigen detection.

Authors:  Jayant S Kalpoe; Aloys C M Kroes; Menno D de Jong; Janke Schinkel; Caroline S de Brouwer; Matthias F C Beersma; Eric C J Claas
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2004-04       Impact factor: 5.948

3.  Surveillance of active human cytomegalovirus infection in hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HLA sibling identical donor): search for optimal cutoff value by real-time PCR.

Authors:  Renata M B Peres; Cláudia R C Costa; Paula D Andrade; Sandra H A Bonon; Dulcinéia M Albuquerque; Cristiane de Oliveira; Afonso C Vigorito; Francisco J P Aranha; Cármino A de Souza; Sandra C B Costa
Journal:  BMC Infect Dis       Date:  2010-06-01       Impact factor: 3.090

4.  Measurement of human cytomegalovirus loads by quantitative real-time PCR for monitoring clinical intervention in transplant recipients.

Authors:  Haijing Li; J Stephen Dummer; Wray R Estes; Shufang Meng; Peter F Wright; Yi-Wei Tang
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2003-01       Impact factor: 5.948

5.  Survey of CMV management in pediatric allogeneic HSCT programs, on behalf of the inborn errors, infectious diseases and pediatric diseases working parties of EBMT.

Authors:  T Bontant; P Sedlaçek; A Balduzzi; B Gaspar; S Cesaro; H Einsele; C Peters; J-H Dalle
Journal:  Bone Marrow Transplant       Date:  2013-10-28       Impact factor: 5.483

6.  Quantification of cytomegalovirus DNA by a fully automated real-time PCR for early diagnosis and monitoring of active viral infection in solid organ transplant recipients.

Authors:  M Boaretti; A Sorrentino; C Zantedeschi; A Forni; L Boschiero; R Fontana
Journal:  J Clin Virol       Date:  2012-11-22       Impact factor: 3.168

7.  Comparison of quantitation of cytomegalovirus DNA by real-time PCR in whole blood with the cytomegalovirus antigenemia assay.

Authors:  Seonhee Kwon; Bo Kyeung Jung; Sun-Young Ko; Chang Kyu Lee; Yunjung Cho
Journal:  Ann Lab Med       Date:  2014-12-08       Impact factor: 3.464

8.  Comparison of quantitative cytomegalovirus real-time PCR in whole blood and pp65 antigenemia assay: clinical utility of CMV real-time PCR in hematopoietic stem cell transplant recipients.

Authors:  Su-Mi Choi; Dong-Gun Lee; Jihyang Lim; Sun Hee Park; Jung-Hyun Choi; Jin-Hong Yoo; Jong-Wook Lee; Yonggoo Kim; Kyungja Han; Woo-Sung Min; Wan-Shik Shin; Chun-Choo Kim
Journal:  J Korean Med Sci       Date:  2009-07-29       Impact factor: 2.153

9.  Relationship between pp65 antigenemia levels and real-time quantitative DNA PCR for Human Cytomegalovirus (HCMV) management in immunocompromised patients.

Authors:  Elisabetta Cariani; Caterina P Pollara; Barbara Valloncini; Francesca Perandin; Carlo Bonfanti; Nino Manca
Journal:  BMC Infect Dis       Date:  2007-11-23       Impact factor: 3.090

10.  Pediatric Reference Intervals for Biochemical Markers: Gaps and Challenges, Recent National Initiatives and Future Perspectives.

Authors:  Houman Tahmasebi; Victoria Higgins; Angela W S Fung; Dorothy Truong; Nicole M A White-Al Habeeb; Khosrow Adeli
Journal:  EJIFCC       Date:  2017-03-08
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.