Cargando…
Automation and standardisation of clinical molecular testing using PCR.Ai – A comparative performance study
BACKGROUND: We 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 real-time PCR (qPCR). OBJECTIVES: We evaluated the impact of PCR.Ai w...
Autores principales: | , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Elsevier B.V.
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7172212/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31563652 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcv.2019.08.005 |
Sumario: | BACKGROUND: We 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 real-time PCR (qPCR). OBJECTIVES: We evaluated the impact of PCR.Ai when used as the final interpretation/verification step for routine in-house qPCR tests for respiratory pathogens and for norovirus for a total of 22,200 interpretations. STUDY DESIGN: We compared PCR.Ai to our existing manual interpretation, to determine accuracy and hands-on time savings. PCR.Ai was accurate. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: There was 100% concurrence between validated respiratory virus and norovirus detection by our manual routine analysis method and PCR.Ai. Furthermore, there were significant routine savings with PCR.Ai of 45 min/respiratory run and 32 min/norovirus run. Our conclusion is that 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. |
---|