Evaluation of the Abbott RealTime quantitative CMV and EBV assays using the maxCycle protocol in a laboratory automation context.

In this study, we showed that both EBV assays exhibited a similar sensitivity but with a better precision for the EBV Abbott RealTime assay. For the CMV performances, the Abbott assay was more sensitive and more precise than our routine method. The use of WHO International Standards also indicated a slight underestimation of the viral loads (-0.25 log10 IU/mL and -0.21 log10 IU/mL for CMV and EBV assays respectively) while these were rather overestimated with the Starlet/Diagenode method (0.48 log10 IU/mL and 0.19 log10 IU/mL for CMV and EBV assays respectively). These trends were confirmed using relevant whole-blood clinical samples and external quality controls. The workflows were also compared and we highlighted a significant technician hands-on time reduction (-63%) using the Abbott CMV/EBV maxCycle automated protocol. PMID: 31121188 [PubMed - as supplied by publisher]
Source: Journal of Virological Methods - Category: Virology Authors: Tags: J Virol Methods Source Type: research