Linked Life Data

9817859

Source:http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/id/9817859

Statements in which the resource exists as a subject.
PredicateObject
rdf:type
lifeskim:mentions
pubmed:issue
12
pubmed:dateCreated
1998-12-17
pubmed:abstractText
We conducted a comparative evaluation of the Chlamydiazyme (Abbott Laboratories), PACE 2 (Gen-Probe), and AMP-CT (Gen-Probe) assays for the detection of Chlamydia trachomatis in endocervical samples. Specimens from 787 females were included in the study. The sensitivities of the PACE 2 and Chlamydiazyme assays in comparison to the results of the AMP-CT assay were 79.3 and 63.4%, respectively. The specificities of the Chlamydiazyme and PACE 2 assays were 100%. All of the positive specimens detected in this study were positive by the AMP-CT assay. On the basis of the final results of the comparison, the prevalence of C. trachomatis in the population was 10.4%. Retesting of specimens whose results were in the intermediate zone by the PACE 2 assay by a probe competition assay identified some additional true-positive specimens. Amplification assay testing of such specimens did not significantly increase the yield. The majority of specimens which tested positive by the AMP-CT assay only were not in the intermediate zone by the PACE 2 assay. We were unable to identify demographic or clinical factors which could predict those individuals who tested positive by amplified tests but not by nonamplified tests. The Gen-Probe PACE 2 assay proved to be superior to the Chlamydiazyme assay for the screening and diagnosis of C. trachomatis infections in female endocervical specimens.
pubmed:commentsCorrections
http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/commentcorrection/9817859-1597199, http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/commentcorrection/9817859-163932, http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/commentcorrection/9817859-1848025, http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/commentcorrection/9817859-2185264, http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/commentcorrection/9817859-2584383, http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/commentcorrection/9817859-7790456, http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/commentcorrection/9817859-8150979, http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/commentcorrection/9817859-8315015, http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/commentcorrection/9817859-9003605, http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/commentcorrection/9817859-9003620, http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/commentcorrection/9817859-9157137, http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/commentcorrection/9817859-9157168, http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/commentcorrection/9817859-9316920
pubmed:language
eng
pubmed:journal
pubmed:citationSubset
IM
pubmed:chemical
pubmed:status
MEDLINE
pubmed:month
Dec
pubmed:issn
0095-1137
pubmed:author
pubmed:issnType
Print
pubmed:volume
36
pubmed:owner
NLM
pubmed:authorsComplete
Y
pubmed:pagination
3488-91
pubmed:dateRevised
2009-11-18
pubmed:meshHeading
pubmed:year
1998
pubmed:articleTitle
Comparative evaluation of chlamydiazyme, PACE 2, and AMP-CT assays for detection of Chlamydia trachomatis in endocervical specimens.
pubmed:affiliation
Cadham Provincial Laboratory, Department of Medical Microbiology, University of Manitoba, Canada. jwylie@mb.sympatico.ca
pubmed:publicationType
Journal Article, Comparative Study