RESUMEN
Human herpesviruses 6 (HHV-6), 7 (HHV-7) and 8 (HHV-8) are lymphotropic herpesviruses that may cause opportunistic diseases in immunosuppressed patients such as transplant or AIDS patients. The new commercial CMV HHV-6, 7, 8 R-gene kit (Argene, Varilhes, France) for the simultaneous quantitation of HHV-6 and qualitative detection of HHV-7 and HHV-8 was evaluated using whole blood samples (respectively, n=175, 100 and 161) and using different extraction and real-time PCR platforms in two Centers A and B. In comparison with HHV-6 in-house real-time PCR the commercial kit showed agreements of 96% (n=75) and 85% (n=100) in A and B, respectively, with significant Spearman's correlation between both techniques (in A: r=0.97 [p<0.001]; in B: r=0.70 [p<0.001]). The Bland-Altman test results and prospective monitoring of patients confirmed the accuracy of these HHV-6 real-time PCR techniques. The agreement between the in-house HHV-7 PCR and commercial kit was of 86% (n=100). In comparison with in-house HHV-8 real-time PCRs, the commercial kit showed agreements of 100% (n=61) and 93.7% (n=96) in A and B, respectively. These results demonstrate that the new commercial CMV HHV-6, 7, 8 R-gene kit was an efficient and reliable tool for the diagnosis of herpesvirus 6, 7, 8 infections.
Asunto(s)
Sangre/virología , Herpesvirus Humano 6/aislamiento & purificación , Herpesvirus Humano 7/aislamiento & purificación , Herpesvirus Humano 8/aislamiento & purificación , Reacción en Cadena de la Polimerasa/métodos , Infecciones por Herpesviridae/diagnóstico , Herpesvirus Humano 6/genética , Herpesvirus Humano 7/genética , Herpesvirus Humano 8/genética , Humanos , Infecciones por Roseolovirus/diagnóstico , Sensibilidad y EspecificidadRESUMEN
Automated real-time PCR systems have become the most common method in the quantitation of viral load during cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection in immuno-compromised patients. In order to evaluate a new commercially available CMV real-time PCR assay (CMV R-gene, Argene, France), a pp65 antigenemia assay and four different "in-house" real-time PCR assays were compared to the CMV R-gene for the detection and the quantitation of CMV load in 506 specimens of whole blood from transplant patients in four French hospital laboratories. The CMV R-gene was more sensitive than the pp65 antigenemia: there were 18% antigenemia-negative versus CMV R-gene-positive samples. A significant correlation was found between DNA quantitation by CMV R-gene and the number of positive cells detected by the pp65 antigenemia test (Spearman's rank test, r=0.63, p<0.0001). A CMV DNA load equivalent to 50 pp65-positive cells/200000 polymorphonuclear leukocytes was 5.26log(10)copies/mL of whole blood. When the CMV R-gene kit was compared to the four other "in-house" real-time PCR assays, there were few discordant results (6.7% total for the four laboratories), all detected with a weak positive CMV DNA viral load. Spearman's coefficients showed a good (r=0.82 for laboratory 1, r=0.66 for laboratory 3) to excellent (r=0.99 for laboratory 2, r=0.94 for laboratory 4) correlation between CMV R-gene and the four real-time "in-house" PCR assays. However, the results of CMV DNA viral load generated by CMV R-gene test were constantly higher than those generated by three out of four "in-house" PCR assays. This mean variation in CMV DNA viral load measured by CMV R-gene and "in-house" PCRs was of 0.77log(10), 0.04log(10), 0.77log(10) and 0.97log(10), for laboratories 1, 2, 3 and 4, respectively. We concluded that there was variability between results of different real-time PCR assays for CMV DNA quantitation. This observation emphasized the need of a standardised commercial assay to allow an "inter-laboratory" comparison of results. Our study showed that CMV R-gene is an accurate, efficient, reliable and versatile tool for rapid diagnosis and monitoring of CMV disease in transplantation recipients.