Dynamic range of hepatitis C virus RNA quantification with the Cobas Ampliprep-Cobas Amplicor HCV Monitor v2.0 assay

Accurate quantification of hepatitis C virus (HCV) RNA is needed in clinical practice to decide whether to continue or stop pegylated interferon-alpha-ribavirin combination therapy at week 12 of treatment for patients with chronic hepatitis C. Currently the HCV RNA quantification assay most widely used worldwide is the Amplicor HCV Monitor v2.0 assay (Roche Molecular Systems, Pleasanton, Calif.). The HCV RNA extraction step can be automated in the Cobas Ampliprep device. In this work, we show that the dynamic range of HCV RNA quantification of the Cobas Ampliprep/Cobas Amplicor HCV Monitor v2.0 procedure is 600 to 200,000 HCV RNA IU/ml (2.8 to 5.3 log IU/ml), which does not cover the full range of HCV RNA levels in infected patients. Any sample containing more than 200,000 IU/ml (5.3 log IU/ml) must thus be retested after dilution for accurate quantification. These results emphasize the need for commercial HCV RNA quantification assays with a broader range of linear quantification, such as real-time PCR-based assays.     

Second generation of the automated Cobas Amplicor HCV assay improves sensitivity of hepatitis C virus RNA detection and yields results that are more clinically relevant

The first and second generations of the Cobas Amplicor HCV assay were compared among patients at risk of hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection. The second-generation test was found to be of greater sensitivity and of good specificity among clinical specimens containing HCV RNA of different genotypes. Finally, this new test is shown to predict the outcome of interferon therapy better.     

Clinical evaluation of the automated COBAS AMPLICOR HCV MONITOR test version 2.0 for quantifying serum hepatitis C virus RNA and comparison to the quantiplex HCV version 2.0 test

A second-generation hepatitis C virus (HCV) quantitative assay (COBAS AMPLICOR HCV MONITOR Test, version 2.0; COBAS HCM-2) has been developed, with the intention of achieving equivalent quantification of all HCV genotypes and improving assay performance. To evaluate the clinical performance of COBAS HCM-2 and its utility in predicting the response to alpha interferon treatment, sera from 215 chronic hepatitis C patients were analyzed and the results were compared with those obtained by the Quantiplex bDNA HCV RNA, version 2.0, assay (bDNA-2). The COBAS HCM-2 had significantly greater sensitivity than bDNA-2 (94.9 versus 88.4%; P < 0.001) when performed with sera from chronic hepatitis C patients who were viremic by a qualitative PCR test. The standard deviations for the within-run and between-run reproducibilities of COBAS HCM-2 were <0. 1 and <0.2, respectively, and it showed an improved linear range between genotypes with the threefold serial dilutions tested (r(2) = 0.986 to 0.995). The COBAS HCM-2 results were positively correlated with the bDNA-2 results, but the values for COBAS HCM-2 were on average 0.96 log lower than the values for bDNA-2. The mean difference in quantification values between these two assays did not differ among samples with different genotypes (0.70 to 1.00 log). No genotype-dependent difference in viral load was observed. The pretreatment viral load was significantly lower in complete responders. By using multivariate analysis, the viral load 2 weeks after the initiation of alpha interferon treatment was the strongest predictor of a complete response. In conclusion, COBAS HCM-2 demonstrated good sensitivity, linearity, and reproducibility and efficiency equal to that of bDNA-2 for the quantification of HCV genotypes 1 and 2. Hence, this assay provides a rapid and reliable method for the quantification of HCV RNA in serum and is useful for the planning of interferon treatment.     

Clinical application of the Quantiplex HCV RNA 2.0 and Amplicor HCV Monitor assays for quantifying serum hepatitis C virus RNA

AIM: To compare the performance characteristics and clinical application of two different technologies for quantifying serum hepatitis C virus (HCV) RNA levels. METHODS: HCV RNA was quantified by Amplicor HCV Monitor assay (Amplicor) and Quantiplex HCV RNA 2.0 assay (bDNA-2) in 119 sera from 107 HCV infected patients. RESULTS: Both assays had similar sensitivity (79.4% for Amplicor; 86.0% for bDNA-2), acceptable coefficients of variation (5.3% in Amplicor; 2.6% in bDNA-2), and good linearity (r2 > or = 0.98). There was a positive correlation between quantification values of both methods (r = 0.683, p < 0.001). The Amplicor values were on an average 1.76 log lower than bDNA-2 results. Male subjects and HCV genotype 1b were significantly associated with higher viral load determined by Amplicor, but not with viral load measured by bDNA-2. In 70 chronic HCV infected patients treated with interferon alfa, mean (SD) pretreatment viral load in 27 complete responders (3.47 (0.84) logs for Amplicor, 5.63 (0.58) for bDNA-2) was significantly lower than in non-responders (4.43 (1.01) logs for Amplicor, 6.10 (0.67) logs for bDNA-2; p < 0.001). Cut off points of 3.9 logs for Amplicor and 5.8 logs for bDNA-2 were determined to be the best for predicting response to interferon alfa, giving acceptable sensitivity (70.4%, 74.1%), specificity (72.1%, 65.1%), and accuracy (71.4%, 68.6%), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Both the Amplicor and bDNA-2 assays are clinically useful methods for HCV RNA quantification and are reliable for predicting the outcome of treatment, despite differences in absolute quantification values and in the correlation between HCV genotypes and viral load.     

Overestimation of the hepatitis C virus RNA content of reference preparations by the AMPLICOR HCV monitor test,version 2.0

An evaluation of the AMPLICOR hepatitis C virus (HCV) monitor test, version 2.0 (Roche Diagnostics), was carried out to investigate whether this test overestimates the HCV RNA content of reference preparations. Satisfactory accuracy was observed when the World Health Organization HCV international standard was included in the assay and a modified formula was used to calculate the viral content.     

Comparative evaluation of the VERSANT HCV RNA 3.0, QUANTIPLEX HCV RNA 2.0, and COBAS AMPLICOR HCV MONITOR version 2.0 Assays for quantification of hepatitis C virus RNA in serum

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 < or = 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 < or = 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.     

Performance of the New Bayer VERSANT HCV RNA 3.0 assay for quantitation of hepatitis C virus RNA in plasma and serum: conversion to international units and comparison with the Roche COBAS Amplicor HCV Monitor, Version 2.0, assay

We have evaluated the VERSANT HCV RNA 3.0. Assay (HCV 3.0 bDNA assay) (Bayer Diagnostics, Berkeley, Calif.), which is an improved signal amplification procedure for the HCV 2.0 bDNA assay for the quantitation of hepatitis C virus (HCV) RNA in serum or plasma of HCV-infected individuals. The HCV 3.0 bDNA assay has a linear dynamic range of 2.5 x 10(3) to 4.0 x 10(7) HCV RNA copies per ml (c/ml). The performance of the HCV 3.0 bDNA assay was evaluated using three different test panels. An overall specificity of 96.8% relative to the detection limit of the HCV 3.0 bDNA assay was found. The intra- and interrun reproducibilities for both the dilution panel and the NAP (AcroMetrix, Benicia, Calif.) panel were consistent with coefficients of variation of less than 9%. Quantitation with the HCV 3.0 bDNA assay was linear over the entire range of both panels (ranges of 4.4 x 10(3) to 3.5 x 10(6) c/ml and 5 x 10(3) to 2 x 10(6) IU/ml, respectively), with correlation coefficients of 0.999, slopes close to one, and intercepts close to zero. The regression equation indicated that 1 IU corresponded to about 4.8 copies of HCV RNA. A correlation coefficient of 0.941 was found for HCV RNA values (in international units per milliliter) obtained from the HCV 3.0 bDNA assay and the HCV Monitor version 2.0 assay (HCV Monitor 2.0 assay) (Roche Diagnostic Systems, Branchburg, N.J.). Quantitative results obtained close to the lower limit of the HCV 3.0 bDNA assay might imply that its lower limit should be reconsidered and raised, if necessary. It appeared that quantitation values obtained from the HCV Monitor 2.0 assay of between 5 x 10(2) and 10(5) IU/ml were in general higher than those obtained from the HCV 3.0 bDNA assay, whereas values obtained from the HCV Monitor 2.0 assay were underestimated for samples with HCV RNA levels above 10(5) IU/ml.     

Quantification of hepatitis C virus by TaqMan PCR: comparison with HCV Amplicor Monitor assay.

The quantitation of serum levels of hepatitis C virus RNA in chronic hepatitis C has been regarded as one of the most important indicators for the outcome of interferon therapy. A new method was used for quantitating the copy number of hepatitis C virus RNA using TaqMan polymerase chain reaction and for comparing the ability and usefulness of this assay with Amplicor Monitor assay in 138 patients. The detection range of hepatitis C virus RNA by TaqMan polymerase chain reaction was from 2 x 10(3) to 2 x 10(8) copies/ml. Hepatitis C virus RNA was detectable in 128 cases (92.8%) and undetectable in 10 cases (7.2%) by this method. The RNA levels measured by Amplicor Monitor assay correlated significantly with those measured by TaqMan polymerase chain reaction assay and the sensitivity of the two assays was almost equal. Thus, TaqMan polymerase chain reaction assay appears sufficiently sensitive for the evaluation of hepatitis C virus RNA and would be useful for the diagnosis and management of hepatitis C virus infection.     

Effect of genotypes on the quantification of hepatitis C virus (HCV) RNA in clinical samples using the amplicor HCV monitor test and the quantiplex HCV RNA 2.0 assay (bDNA)

The Amplicor HCV Monitor test and the Quantiplex HCV RNA 2.0 (bDNA) assay are two commercially available assays for the quantification of hepatitis C virus (HCV) RNA in clinical samples. A direct comparison of the two assays was carried out using sera frozen previously from patients known to be chronically infected with HCV. Overall, 61 samples from 51 patients were tested simultaneously by the two methods: 67% (28/42) of the patients were infected by HCV genotype/serotype 1, 10 % (4/42) with type 2, and 24% (10/42) with type 3. When the absolute value from each assay was examined, the Quantiplex assay gave a consistently higher reading and the mean logarithmic difference between the two assays was 1.4 (1.0 in type 1, 2.0 in type 2, and 2.2 in type 3). When analyzed according to genotype, strong correlation was observed between the two assays for type 1 (r = 0.83, 95% CI 0.63–0.93, P < 0.01), but not for nontype 1 samples. Despite the difference in absolute level reported by the two assays, there was a consistent trend of change in HCV RNA concentration by both assays in patients whose consecutive samples were analyzed and the differences between the two assays in consecutive samples were within 0.4 log of each other. The results suggested that with samples containing genotype 1, the Amplicor assay was more sensitive than the Quantiplex assay by about one log. However, the sensitivities of the two assays with nontype 1 samples were much closer probably due to the failure of the Amplicor assay to quantify nontype 1 genotypes effectively. J. Med. Virol. 55:191–196, 1998. © 1998 Wiley-Liss, Inc.     

Clinical significance of Cobas Amplicor HCV Monitor test v 2.0 for quantifying a wide range of serum HCV-RNA in patients with chronic hepatitis C

Recently, we evaluated the clinical significance of a new assay, the semi-automated Cobas Amplicor HCV Monitor test v 2.0 (Roche, Cobas-HIGH-RANGE assay), for quantifying serum hepatitis C virus RNA throughout a wider range than the traditional assay, Amplicor GT HCV Monitor test v 2.0 (GT-ORIGINAL assay). We compared the results of the Cobas-HIGH-RANGE assay with results of the GT-ORIGINAL assay. This study was conducted on serum from 91 patients with chronic hepatitis C at the Gastroenterological Center, Yokohama City University Medical Center. The percent coefficient of variation (CV) for the within-run and between-run reproducibility of the Cobas-HIGH-RANGE assay ranged from 0.7 to 2.3% and from 1.3 to 2.0%, respectively. The Cobas-HIGH-RANGE assay exhibited a linear range extending from 5 to 5000 KIU/ml. The values for all 17 samples determined as less than 0.5 KIU/ml by the GT-ORIGINAL assay were also determined as less than 5 KIU/ml by the Cobas-HIGH-RANGE assay. For the 48 samples with values of 0.5 to 850 KIU/ml determined by the GT-ORIGINAL assay, the values obtained by these two assay methods were significantly correlated (r2 = 0.9117, y = 1.0667x-0.0801, p < 0.001), but the values of HCV-RNA determined by the Cobas-HIGH-RANGE assay were significantly (p < 0.05) higher than those determined by the GT-ORIGINAL assay. Consequently, these data indicate that the HIGH-RANGE assay is a useful alternative assay method for measurement of HCV-RNA instead of the ORIGINAL assay, and that the HIGH-RANGE assay could be a useful tool for monitoring the efficacy of antiviral treatment.     

Assessment of viral loads in patients with chronic hepatitis C with AMPLICOR HCV MONITOR version 1.0, COBAS HCV MONITOR version 2.0, and QUANTIPLEX HCV RNA version 2.0 assays

The correlation between response to antiviral therapy and pretreatment viral load in patients with chronic hepatitis C has prompted the development of quantitative assays to measure viral load. The aim of our study was to assess the clinical relevance of the newly developed semiautomated PCR system COBAS HCV MONITOR version 2.0 in comparison with (i) the AMPLICOR HCV MONITOR version 1.0 assay, which underestimates RNA concentration of hepatitis C virus (HCV) genotypes 2 to 6, and (ii) the QUANTIPLEX HCV RNA version 2.0 assay, which achieves equivalent quantification for each HCV genotype, with samples from 174 patients diagnosed with chronic hepatitis C before therapy. The level and range of quantification measured with AMPLICOR HCV MONITOR version 1.0 were 1 log lower than when measured with the COBAS HCV MONITOR version 2.0, at 0.261 x 10(6) RNA copies/ml (range, 0.001 x 10(6) to 2.50 x 10(6) RNA copies/ml) and 4.032 x 10(6) RNA copies/ml (range, 0.026 x 10(6) to 72.6 x 10(6) RNA copies/ml), respectively. The two assays showed a poor correlation (r(2) = 0.175). The level and range of quantification were similar when measured with the COBAS HCV MONITOR version 2.0 and QUANTIPLEX HCV RNA version 2.0 assays, at 3.03 x 10(6) RNA copies/ml (range, 0.023 x 10(6) to 72.6 x 10(6) RNA copies/ml) and 4.91 Meq/ml (range, 0.200 to 49.5 Meq/ml), respectively. The two assays showed a strong correlation (r(2) = 0. 686) for each HCV genotype. The duration of treatment (6 or 12 months) is modulated according to HCV genotype and viral load. Our results indicate that COBAS HCV MONITOR version 2.0 and QUANTIPLEX HCV RNA version 2.0 assays showing an equal dynamic range for each HCV genotype are suitable tools to assess patients before therapy.     

Evaluation of the new LCx HIV RNA quantitative assay: comparison with the Cobas Amplicor HIV Monitor assay

In the present study we evaluated the performance of the new LCx HIV RNA quantitative kit (Abbott Laboratories, Delkenheim, Germany) for the quantitative detection of HIV-1 RNA in human plasma in comparison to the Cobas Amplicor HIV-1 Monitor assay (Roche Diagnostics, Branchburg, N.J.), including samples containing a variety of HIV-1 subtypes. LCx and Cobas were compared using archived EDTA plasma samples collected from HIV-infected patients. Considering the lower limit of the linear range of 50 copies/ml, the detection rate of the LCx was 139 out of 174 (79.9%) versus 131 out of 174 (75.3%) of the Cobas. Overall agreement was 95.4% (166/174) at a cut-off of 50 copies. LCx and Cobas results on clinical samples were found linearly associated (r2 = 0.900) and strongly correlated (r = 0.949). The mean viral load in the 174 frozen patient samples was 3.25 log10 copies/ml by LCx compared to 2.71 log10 copies/ml by Cobas. Considering only samples with a viral load > or =50 copies/ml, the average difference was -0.132 log copy/ml. Using a panel consisting of 9 plasma samples spiked with 9 different HIV-1 cultured isolates (A-H, and O) LCx detected the 9 subtypes with a high degree of precision, i.e., 9-33% coefficient of variation. As expected, the Cobas failed to detect the group O isolates. The results of the remaining samples showed a higher degree of variation (when testing four replicates of the subtype panel) than the LCx of 14.2-40.3%. Nevertheless, the results were comparable with the LCx data.     

Evaluation of the Abbott RealTime HCV assay for quantitative detection of hepatitis C virus RNA.

BACKGROUND: The Abbott RealTime HCV assay for quantitative detection of HCV RNA has recently been introduced. OBJECTIVES: In this study, the performance of the Abbott RealTime HCV assay was evaluated and compared to the COBAS AmpliPrep/COBAS TaqMan HCV test. STUDY DESIGN: Accuracy, linearity, interassay and intra-assay variations were determined, and a total of 243 routine clinical samples were investigated. RESULTS: When accuracy of the new assay was tested, the majority of results were found to be within +/-0.5 log(10) unit of the results obtained by reference laboratories. Determination of linearity resulted in a quasilinear curve up to 1.0 x 10(6)IU/ml. The interassay variation ranged from 15% to 32%, and the intra-assay variation ranged from 5% to 8%. When clinical samples were tested by the Abbott RealTime HCV assay and the results were compared with those obtained by the COBAS AmpliPrep/COBAS TaqMan HCV test, the results for 93% of all samples with positive results by both tests were found to be within +/-1.0 log(10) unit. The viral loads for all patients measured by the Abbott and Roche assays showed a high correlation (R(2)=0.93); quantitative results obtained by the Abbott assay were found to be lower than those obtained by the Roche assay. CONCLUSIONS: The Abbott RealTime HCV assay proved to be suitable for use in the routine diagnostic laboratory. The time to results was similar for both of the assays.     

Evaluation of the performance of the EIAgen HCV test for detection of hepatitis C virus infection

The EIAgen HCV test (Adaltis Inc., Montreal, Canada) is an enzyme immunoassay (EIA) for the detection of anti-hepatitis C virus (HCV) antibodies. This study compared the performance of this test side-by-side with the current Ortho HCV 3.0 Anti-HCV assay (Ortho-Clinical Diagnostics Inc., Johnson & Johnson Company, Raritan, NY, USA). Among 2559 specimens examined, 178 were true positives, 2376 were true negatives and 5 were indeterminate. The sensitivity of the EIAgen HCV test was 100%, versus 98.3% for the Ortho HCV test, while their respective specificities were 98.1% and 98.2%. The EIAgen HCV test gave a positive predictive value of 79.8% and a negative predictive value of 100%. Overall, the concordance of this test with the Ortho HCV test was 98.2%. Specimens from potentially interfering substances, such as sera from pregnant women, sera from patients with acute non-C hepatitis, autoimmune diseases, lipidemia, or from patients undergoing hemolysis, showed no interference with either EIA. An EIAgen HCV test signal-to-cut-off ratio of >5.9 would be highly predictive of a true-positive finding in these specimens. The EIAgen HCV test is well suited for screening blood and blood products in antibodies to HCV.     

Successful HCV genotyping of previously failed and low viral load specimens using an HCV RNA qualitative assay based on transcription-mediated amplification in conjunction with the line probe assay.

BACKGROUND: Hepatitis C virus (HCV) genotyping is a critical part of the diagnostic work-up for chronic hepatitis C. The VERSANT HCV line probe assay (LiPA) marketed by Bayer Corporation requires PCR-derived amplicons for genotyping usually obtained from commercial assays, including Amplicor HCV 2.0 (Amplicor 2.0), Amplicor HCV Monitor 2.0, or SuperQuant. Occasionally, PCR-based methods in conjunction with LiPA fail to give a genotyping result. Although most genotyping failures occur among low viral load specimens, some occur in specimens with relatively high viral loads. The Bayer HCV RNA Qualitative assay (HCV TMA), with a limit of detection of approximately 5-10 IU/ml, is more sensitive than other commercial assays. OBJECTIVES: An HCV genotyping protocol using HCV TMA linked with LiPA (TMA-LiPA) was developed and tested for ability to genotype samples that had previously failed genotyping by PCR-based methods in conjunction with LiPA. STUDY DESIGN: Clinical specimens were obtained from eight independent laboratories in Canada and the US and tested with TMA-LiPA at the Bayer Reference Testing Laboratory. Specimens included those that failed to produce a genotype result when a PCR-based assay was used in conjunction with LiPA and specimens for which genotyping was not attempted because the viral load was below the validated cut-off determined in the laboratory of origin. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: TMA-LiPA successfully genotyped 68 of 75 (90.7%) specimens that had failed genotyping by PCR-based methods used in conjunction with LiPA and 36 of 40 (90.0%) specimens that were rejected for genotyping due to low viral load. Moreover, TMA-LiPA assigned subtype for 79 of 107 (73.8%) specimens. Our TMA-LiPA results reflected the distribution of HCV genotypes found in North America, and were 100% concordant with those of Amplicor 2.0 in conjunction with LiPA for control specimens genotyped by both assays. TMA-LiPA may prove useful both in optimizing LiPA performance and genotyping patient specimens.