Detección y cuantificación de VHB y VHC en muestras de plasma mediante la utilización de diferentes ensayos moleculares: estudio comparativo / Detection and quantification of HBV and HCV in plasma samples by means of different molecular assays: Comparative study

Introducción: La carga viral es un marcador muy útil para realizar el seguimiento de los pacientes infectados por VHB y VHC. Este trabajo compara ensayos basados en amplificación mediada por transcripción y en PCR a tiempo real con el objetivo de comprobar si pueden ser intercambiables. Material y métodos: Estudio bicéntrico en el que se analizó la carga viral de 147 muestras de plasma de pacientes infectados por VHB y 229 por VHC, mediante ensayos basados en amplificación mediada por transcripción (Aptima® HBV Quant y Aptima® HCV Quant Dx, que utilizan el sistema Panther (Hologic®)) y PCR a tiempo real (COBAS® AmpliPrep / COBAS® TaqMan® y COBAS® 6800), calculando el grado de concordancia entre ellos. Resultados: Se detectó carga viral en ambos equipos en 60 (40,82%) muestras de VHB (mediana del log de la carga viral: COBAS®: 2,51UI/mL (RIC 2,20-3,17), Panther: 2,71UI/mL (RIC 2,21-3,22)) y en 39 (16,96%) muestras de VHC (mediana del log de la carga viral: COBAS®: 3,93UI/mL (RIC 2,24-6,01), Panther: 3,80UI/mL (RIC 1,99-6,14)). La concordancia entre ambos equipos fue de κ=0,943 para VHB y κ=0,925 para VHC. La comparación de las muestras con carga viral detectada mediante los 2 ensayos mostró una correlación alta tanto para VHB (R2=0,86) como para VHC (R2=0,97). Conclusiones: Los ensayos basados tanto en amplificación mediada por transcripción como en PCR a tiempo real pueden ser intercambiables para el manejo de pacientes infectados con VHB y VHC.(AU)

Introduction: Viral load is a very useful marker for monitoring patients infected with HBV and HCV. This work compares assays based on transcription-mediated amplification and on real-time PCR to verify whether they can be interchangeable. Material and methods: a bicentric study, in which 147 plasma samples from patients infected with HBV and 229 with HCV were analyzed, was carried out. Transcription-mediated amplification-based assays (Aptima® HBV Quant and Aptima® HCV Quant Dx, employing Panther system (Hologic®)) and on real-time PCR (COBAS® AmpliPrep / COBAS® TaqMan® and COBAS® 6800) were used and the degree of concordance between them was calculated. Results: Viral load was detected in both systems in 60 (40.82%) HBV samples (median log viral load: COBAS®: 2.51IU/mL (IQR 2.20-3.17), Panther: 2.71IU/mL (IQR 2.21-3.22)) and in 39 (16.96%) HCV samples (median log viral load: COBAS®: 3.93IU/mL (IQR 2.24-6.01), Panther: 3.80IU/mL (IQR 1.99-6.14)). The agreement between both systems was κ=0.943 for HBV and κ=0.925 for HCV. Comparison of viral load samples detected by both assays showed a hight correlation for HBV (R2=0.86) and for HCV (R2=0.97). Conclusions: Both transcription-mediated amplification and on real-time PCR based assays may be interchangeable for the management of patients infected with HBV and HCV.(AU)

Detection and quantification of HBV and HCV in plasma samples by means of different molecular assays: Comparative study.

INTRODUCTION: Viral load is a very useful marker for monitoring patients infected with HBV and HCV. This work compares assays based on transcription-mediated amplification (TMA) and on real-time PCR (RT-PCR) to verify whether they can be interchangeable. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A bicentric study, in which 147 plasma samples from patients infected with HBV and 229 with HCV were analyzed, was carried out. TMA-based assays (Aptima® HBV Quant and Aptima® HCV Quant Dx, employing Panther system (Hologic®)) and RT-PCR (COBAS® AmpliPrep/COBAS® TaqMan® and COBAS® 6800) were used and the degree of concordance between them was calculated. RESULTS: Viral load was detected in both systems in 60 (40.82%) HBV samples (median log viral load: COBAS: 2.51IU/mL (IQR 2.20-3.17), Panther: 2.71IU/mL (IQR 2.21-3.22)) and in 39 (16.96%) HCV samples (median log viral load: COBAS: 3.93IU/mL (IQR 2.24-6.01), Panther: 3.80IU/mL (IQR 1.99-6.14)). The agreement between both systems was κ=0.943 for HBV and κ=0.925 for HCV. Comparison of viral load samples detected by both assays showed a hight correlation for HBV (R2=0.86) and for HCV (R2=0.97). CONCLUSIONS: Both TMA and RT-PCR based assays may be interchangeable for the management of patients infected with HBV and HCV.