Germer, Jeffrey J.

ABSTRACT The VERSANT hepatitis B virus (HBV) 3.0 Assay (branched DNA [bDNA]) (referred to herein as VERSANT 3.0) was evaluated at four external sites for analytical sensitivity, specificity, reproducibility, linearity of quantification, and limits of detection. In addition, each of the test evaluation sites provided HBV DNA-positive clinical samples that were previously analyzed by one of three commercially available HBV DNA quantitative tests: Digene Hybrid Capture II HBV DNA Test (Digene); VERSANT HBV DNA 1.0 Assay (bDNA) (VERSANT 1.0); and COBAS AMPLICOR HBV Monitor Test (COBAS AMPLICOR). These samples were reexamined using VERSANT 3.0. The results from these studies showed that VERSANT 3.0 has high specificity (99.3%), excellent reproducibility (between-run coefficient of variation [CV] = 1.6 to 9.4%; within-run CV = 6.5 to 20.7%), and a broad linear range of quantification (2.0 × 10 3 to 1.0 × 10 8 HBV DNA copies/ml) that facilitate the monitoring of HBV DNA levels at diagnosis and throughout the course of treatment. In general, correlation was very good between results obtained from clinical samples analyzed by VERSANT 3.0 and the comparative HBV DNA quantitative assays (VERSANT 1.0, R 2 = 0.900; Digene, R 2 = 0.985; COBAS AMPLICOR, R 2 = 0.771). The greatest differences in comparative quantitation occurred at HBV DNA levels approaching the limits of the dynamic ranges for the comparative assays. The performance characteristics of the new VERSANT 3.0 assay demonstrated that it provides a reliable and robust method for routinely monitoring serum HBV DNA levels in assessing disease activity and determining response to antiviral treatment.

ABSTRACT The TRUGENE HCV 5′NC genotyping kit (GeneLibrarian modules 3.1.1 and 3.1.2) and VERSANT HCV genotyping assay were compared by using 96 hepatitis C virus (HCV) RNA-positive patient specimens, including HCV genotypes 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 10. The TRUGENE HCV 5 ′ NC genotyping kit (GeneLibrarian module 3.1.2) yielded the most accurate genotyping results.

ABSTRACT The COBAS AMPLICOR system has played a major role in the transition of molecular diagnostics from research to routine clinical laboratory use by automating the nucleic acid amplification and detection processes. However, sample preparation remains a labor-intensive portion of the procedure. In this study, we evaluated the performance of the COBAS AMPLICOR Hepatitis C Virus Test, version 2.0 (Roche Molecular Systems, Branchburg, N.J.) following manual hepatitis C virus (HCV) RNA extraction versus automated extraction with the MagNA Pure LC instrument (Roche Applied Science, Indianapolis, Ind.). Parallel replicate testing was performed with standard dilutions of 100, 75, 60, and 0 HCV IU/ml and 153 clinical specimens. An analytical sensitivity of 75 IU/ml was achieved with either the manual or the standard-volume (200 μl) automated extraction methodologies (25 of 26 [96.2%]; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 80.4 to 99.9), whereas the clinical sensitivity and specificity were both 100% with either extraction method. A large-volume (1 ml) automated extraction method was also evaluated with standard dilutions of 40, 25, 10, and 0 IU/ml and the same 153 clinical specimens. The analytical sensitivity of the COBAS AMPLICOR assay with the large-volume extraction method was 25 HCV IU/ml (26 of 26 [100%]; 95% CI, 86.8 to 100), whereas the clinical sensitivity and specificity were both 100%. The MagNA Pure LC instrument is a versatile, labor-saving platform capable of integration with minimal modification of the existing assay procedure. The increased sensitivity of the COBAS AMPLICOR Hepatitis C Virus Test, version 2.0 performed in conjunction with large-volume HCV RNA extraction may be important in HCV diagnostic testing as new therapeutic strategies evolve.

ABSTRACT A comparison of quantitative results expressed in hepatitis C virus (HCV) international units per milliliter, obtained from the VERSANT HCV RNA 3.0 (bDNA-3.0) assay, the QUANTIPLEX HCV RNA 2.0 (bDNA-2.0) assay, and the COBAS AMPLICOR HCV MONITOR version 2.0 (HCM-2.0) test was performed. A total of 168 patient specimens submitted to the Mayo Clinic Molecular Microbiology Laboratory for HCV quantification or HCV genotyping were studied. Of the specimens tested, 97, 88, and 79% yielded quantitative results within the dynamic range of the bDNA-3.0, bDNA-2.0, and HCM-2.0 assays, respectively. Overall, there was substantial agreement between the results generated by all three assays. A total of 15 out of 29 (52%) of the specimens determined to contain viral loads of <31,746 IU/ml by the bDNA-3.0 assay were categorized as containing viral loads within the range of 31,746 to 500,000 IU/ml by the bDNA-2.0 assay. Although substantial agreement was noted between the results generated by the bDNA-2.0 and bDNA-3.0 assays, a bias toward higher viral titer by the bDNA-2.0 assay was noted ( P = 0.001). Likewise, although substantial agreement was noted between the results generated by the HCM-2.0 and bDNA-3.0 assays, a bias toward higher viral titer by the bDNA-3.0 assay was noted ( P ≤ 0.001). The discrepancy between the HCM-2.0 and bDNA-3.0 results was more pronounced when viral loads were >500,000 IU/ml and resulted in statistically significant differences ( P ≤ 0.001) in determining whether viral loads were above or below 800,000 IU/ml of HCV RNA, the proposed threshold value for tailoring the duration of combination therapy. The expression of quantitative values in HCV international units per milliliter was a strength of both the bDNA-3.0 and HCM-2.0 assays.