Comparison of COBAS AmpliPrep/COBAS TaqMan HCV Qualitative Test v2.0 with COBAS AMPLICOR Hepatitis C Virus Test v2.0 for the Qualitative Detection of Hepatitis C Virus RNA in Korean Clinical Samples.
- Author:
Soohun YOO
1
;
Younhee PARK
;
Hwan Sub LIM
;
Young Ran KIM
;
Jung Eun SIM
;
Hyon Suk KIM
Author Information
1. Department of Laboratory Medicine, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea. kimhs54@yuhs.ac
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords:
Hepatitis C virus;
Qualitative HCV RNA assay;
COBAS Amplicor;
COBAS AmpliPrep/Cobas TaqMan;
Quantitative HCV RNA real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR)
- MeSH:
Hepacivirus*;
Hepatitis C*;
Hepatitis*;
Real-Time Polymerase Chain Reaction;
RNA
- From:Journal of Laboratory Medicine and Quality Assurance
2013;35(2):93-99
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:Korean
-
Abstract:
BACKGROUND: We comparatively evaluated the performance of the conventional COBAS Amplicor HCV test v2.0 (CAM; Roche Molecular Systems, USA) and the newly developed COBAS AmpliPrep/COBAS TaqMan HCV test v2.0 (CAP/CTM; Roche Molecular Systems) for qualitative detection of hepatitis C virus (HCV) RNA in clinical samples. METHODS: Six hundred serum samples (100 HCV-positive, 500 HCV-negative, as determined by CAM) were selected and analysed using the new qualitative HCV RNA test, CAP/CTM qualitative test. Results were compared by confirmatory CAP/CTM quantitative test, which is a quantitative HCV RNA real-time polymerase chain reaction by Roche Molecular Systems, and anti-HCV test (Roche Diagnostics GmbH, Germany). Twenty-two additional serum samples, which gave a gray zone result by CAM, were selected for comparison. RESULTS: The two qualitative HCV RNA assays yielded concordant results for 586 of 600 tested samples (concordance rate, 97.7%; kappa coefficient, 0.92; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.87 to 0.96; P<0.001). Upon re-testing by CAM, we found that the concordance rate increased to 98.2% (kappa coefficient, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.89 to 0.97; P<0.001). The additional 22 samples showing gray zone results for CAM were retested and were also tested by CAP/CTM. The results for 13 of these samples changed to negative and were now concordant with the CAP/CTM and confirmatory CAP/CTM quantitative results. For the remaining samples, the results were variable. For all the 22 samples, the results of the new CAP/CTM were in agreement with those obtained by confirmatory CAP/CTM quantitative test. CONCLUSIONS: The results of the two assays were in good agreement, with 97.7% concordance rate. However, CAP/CTM is more sensitive than CAM and showed no gray zone results. Therefore, it can be a more efficient and useful test for the qualitative detection of HCV RNA in clinical samples.
