Journal of virological methods · 2024
Automation and standardisation of a quantitative multiplex PCR assay using PCR.Ai.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
MacLean A R, Gunson R
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: We previously undertook a prospective clinical study to evaluate PCR.Ai's (www.pcr.ai) accuracy and impact when automating the manual data-analysis and quality control steps associated with routine clinical pathogen testing using a non-quantitative multiplex quantitative real-time PCR (qPCR). In this study we demonstrated 100 % concurrence between our manual routine analysis method and PCR.Ai. This paper expands the evaluation of PCR.Ai's (www.pcr.ai) accuracy and impact using a multiplex quantitative real-time PCR (qPCR).
OBJECTIVES: We evaluated the impact of PCR.Ai when used as the final interpretation/verification step for routine in-house multiplex quantitative qPCR tests for CMV, EBV and adenovirus from blood samples for a total of 1350 interpretations.
STUDY DESIGN: We compared PCR.Ai to our existing manual interpretation, to determine accuracy and hands on time savings.
RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: There was 100 % concurrence between validated CMV, EBV and adenovirus detection and quantitation by our manual routine analysis method and PCR.Ai. Furthermore, there were significant routine savings with PCR.Ai of 63 minutes/ run. Our conclusion is that for quantitative tests PCR.Ai is a highly accurate time-saving tool that reduces complexity of qPCR analysis and hence the need for specialists and hands-on time. It demonstrated capabilities to enable us to get results out more quickly with lower costs and less risk of errors.
OBJECTIVES: We evaluated the impact of PCR.Ai when used as the final interpretation/verification step for routine in-house multiplex quantitative qPCR tests for CMV, EBV and adenovirus from blood samples for a total of 1350 interpretations.
STUDY DESIGN: We compared PCR.Ai to our existing manual interpretation, to determine accuracy and hands on time savings.
RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: There was 100 % concurrence between validated CMV, EBV and adenovirus detection and quantitation by our manual routine analysis method and PCR.Ai. Furthermore, there were significant routine savings with PCR.Ai of 63 minutes/ run. Our conclusion is that for quantitative tests PCR.Ai is a highly accurate time-saving tool that reduces complexity of qPCR analysis and hence the need for specialists and hands-on time. It demonstrated capabilities to enable us to get results out more quickly with lower costs and less risk of errors.