1.Analysis and comparison strategy of mixed DNA profile without known provider
Yu WANG ; Kunyun MAO ; Jiajia CHEN ; Xinglong HAO ; Run JIA
Chinese Journal of Forensic Medicine 2017;32(6):645-648
Objective From the perspective of making full use of database comparison function, giving certain guidelines to analyze mixed DNA profile,compare database,screen comparison results. Methods Using CPI to describe the identification of mixed DNA profile.Using CPBI to estimate reliability of individual samples being included. Results When CPI is less than 10-7, mixed DNA Profile is worth to be compared in database.When the number of alleles at one locus is more than 2, retain an additional allele will not reduce identification too much. According to the CPBI of the included samples,we can find the most reliable sample.
2.Retrospective analysis of the predictive value of immunoglobulin and complement combined leukocyte levels on the outcome of severe COVID-19
Yong ZHAO ; Weirong ZENG ; Fuan YU ; Youtao HU ; Li XU ; Junfeng ZENG ; Kunyun JIA ; Jianbin SUN ; Jiancheng TU
Chinese Journal of Experimental and Clinical Virology 2021;35(1):1-6
Objective:To retrospectively analyze the blood leukocytes (WBC), lymphocytes (LYM), lymphocyte% (LYM%), and serum total immunoglobulin (IGA, IGG, IGM) and complement (C3, C4) index levels to explore its predictive value for the outcome of COVID-19 severe pneumonia.Methods:Eighty-five COVID-19 patients with severe pneumonia diagnosed in our hospital were randomly selected and were divided into good outcome group (50 cases) and poor outcome group (35 cases). WBC, LYM, LYM%, IGA, IGG, IGM, and C3, C4 level data, and analyze the differences between the two groups, the correlation of each indicator, and ROC curves of single and joint detection to explore relationship between indicators and outcomes, and the predictive efficacy of indicators on outcomes.Results:Differences in WBC, LYM, LYM%, IGG, and IGA levels were significant between the two groups ( P=0.000, 0.015, 0.000, 0.000, 0.001), among them with significant differences, LYM and LYM% were significantly positively correlated ( r=0.669, P=0.000), while WBC and LYM% levels were significantly negatively correlated ( r=-0.600, P=0.000), WBC and IGA levels were significantly positively correlated ( r=0.283, P=0.009) and IGG and IGA levels were also significantly positively correlated ( r=0.0.442, P=0.000); After logistic regression analysis, WBC, LYM, LYM%, IGG, and IGA are all important influencing factors ( P=0.001, 0.022, 0.000, 0.000, 0.003); but only the levels of WBC, IGG, and LYM% are Independent risk factors ( P=0.034, 0.004, 0.001), the ROC curve of the single detection and joint detection of their predicted outcome performance, respectively, and the max AUC (AUC=0.890, P=0.000) at the time of joint testing of WBC, LYM% and IGG, index YI=0.657, it has the greatest predictive power for adverse outcomes, with a sensitivity of 77.10% and a specificity of 88.00%. IGM, C3, C4, IGG/IGM, and C3/C4 levels were not significantly different( P=0.066, 0.204, 0.076, 0.310, 0.156). Conclusions:The levels of WBC, LYM, LYM%, IGG, and IGA in the early admission of COVID-19 infected patients with severe pneumonia have important predictive value for the outcome of them. WBC, LYM% and IGG levels are independent risks and joint detection of the three indexes have the best predictive performance.