Previous Article | Next Article ![]()
Journal of Clinical Microbiology, February 1999, p. 436-437, Vol. 37, No. 2
Molecular Diagnostics Laboratory, Institute
of Hygiene, Karl Franzens University Graz, A-8010 Graz,
Austria,1 and
Clinical Microbiology
Laboratory, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia,
Pennsylvania2
Received 17 August 1998/Returned for modification 5 October
1998/Accepted 2 November 1998
The use of AMPLILINK version 1.0 software was evaluated for the
operation and control of one COBAS AMPLICOR instrument and for two
COBAS AMPLICOR instruments run simultaneously to perform and detect
nucleic acid amplification reactions. A total of 3,384 results were
analyzed. The initial accuracy of the results was 99.91%. Three
errors of omission of transfer of data from the COBAS AMPLICOR to the
AMPLILINK system were observed. Two of these errors were from a single
specimen, where both the analyte and internal control results were not
transmitted. These errors did not interfere with the correctness of any
other data. There were no interruptions of runs, and no data were
mixed. AMPLILINK increased convenience, saved labor, and was found to
be a very useful addition for clinical laboratories performing
molecular-diagnostic procedures with the COBAS AMPLICOR system.
PCR-based molecular assays are
gaining importance in the diagnosis and monitoring of infectious
diseases. In-house assays do not always meet the high-volume
needs of the routine-diagnostic laboratory. They have been reported to
be susceptible to false-positive results because of carryover
contamination due to frequent transfer of reagents (3, 9).
False-negative results may occur because of amplification failure due
to interference from PCR inhibitors (11). The hands-on time
required by an in-house assay further limits its utility in the
routine-diagnostic laboratory. To overcome these problems, the COBAS
AMPLICOR instrument, which allows the automation of the amplification
and detection steps of a PCR test, has been introduced (4,
6). The amplification reagents of qualitative assays include an
internal control to uncover false-negative results due to PCR
inhibitors (8). The COBAS AMPLICOR allows significant
reduction of manual steps and automated calculation of quantitative
test results. When manual quantitative test methods are used instead of
this instrument, serial dilutions have to be prepared, in-range
background-corrected optical densities of the amplified genome and the
quantitation standard must be chosen, and genome copies per milliliter
have to be calculated with a formula that includes total genome and
total quantitation standard optical densities, input quantitation
standard copies, and a conversion factor. The COBAS AMPLICOR can be
used as an unattended system and has been found to be an easy, quick,
and reliable way to perform high-volume PCR (1, 2, 5, 7,
10). However, for additional labor saving and convenience, a
final area needing improvement in this amplification and detection
system was the user interface. Users interact with the system via a
small keypad to manually enter PCR run profiles, to create each test
order for each specimen, and to perform other instrument maintenance
functions. The improvements needed were the ability to link multiple
instruments, to coordinate testing, to simplify startup by creating run
profiles, to create orders, to manage reagent inventory, to read
barcodes to improve the accuracy of identification of samples, and to
manage patient data. Additional help was also needed with the recording
of service and quality control data.
Software (AMPLILINK) was recently developed which proposed to meet
these needs. It was designed to permit the control of up to three COBAS
AMPLICOR instruments as well as to improve the other areas mentioned
above. In the present study, AMPLILINK version 1.0 software, run on a
Windows-based Pentium computer, was evaluated for operation and control
of first one COBAS AMPLICOR instrument and then two instruments run
simultaneously. Printers attached directly to each COBAS AMPLICOR
instrument recorded all data prior to its manipulation by the AMPLILINK
system. A printer was also attached to the AMPLILINK system, and the
results were compared. Besides data manipulation accuracy, other
features of the software were evaluated during the course of the study
at two sites, one in Europe and one in the United States. Technologists
experienced in the use of the COBAS AMPLICOR system performed the testing.
A total of 2,640 qualitative amplification and detection tests were
run, including 1,200 amplifications and detections of internal controls
(Table 1). All samples had earlier been
processed with the corresponding COBAS AMPLICOR specimen preparation
protocols following the manufacturer's instructions. Additionally, 744 quantitative amplification and detection tests were run (Table 1). In
the first week, one COBAS AMPLICOR was run; in weeks 2 to 4, two
COBAS AMPLICOR instruments were run simultaneously. In weeks 1 to
4, basic and parallel modes were run, patient identification was entered with AMPLILINK, and profiles were created and then used to
create orders with AMPLILINK. Status and reagent reports, results, and
system and error messages were collected daily. On a weekly basis,
results were archived and reviewed for consistency of information transfer. All results were then purged once the data had been collected. The AMPLILINK service icon was used to follow all
maintenance of the COBAS AMPLICOR instruments. The results reported by
AMPLILINK were compared to printouts created by a printer which was
directly connected to COBAS AMPLICOR.
0095-1137/99/$04.00+0
Copyright © 1999, American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.
Evaluation of AMPLILINK Software for the COBAS
AMPLICOR System
![]()
ABSTRACT
Top
Abstract
Text
References
![]()
TEXT
Top
Abstract
Text
References
TABLE 1.
Number of detections and accuracy rates of AMPLILINK
version 1.0 software
A total of 3,384 results were obtained by data transfer. AMPLILINK correctly reported 3,381 results. In data transfers for two specimens, an interface failure occurred. Errors (for both the target and the internal control) were observed in one sample dedicated for Mycobacterium tuberculosis detection and in another sample dedicated for quantitative human immunodeficiency virus type 1 detection (Table 1). However, these were errors of omission of transfer of data; i.e., they were not printed. In all three events, the COBAS AMPLICOR had the data and printed them. The overall accuracy rate was 99.91%.
During the whole study, there were no interruptions of runs. Only several minor errors were displayed. No data were mixed, and no data errors were printed.
The new software was easy to load and easy to use. The package was found to be complete, and the format, graphics, and order of presentation were acceptable. The software successfully implemented a complete self-help tutorial and an on-line help menu for reference. The complete status of the COBAS AMPLICOR systems could be seen by looking at the graphical-map-style screens. Orders could be created by using various options, such as typing the test information or scrolling through a list and then copying and pasting or dragging and dropping the information that was required. Results could be outputted directly from the printer allocated to the computer or archived and copied to a floppy disk. Once saved to a disk, the data could be loaded into a laboratory information system (LIS) or manipulated in a personal computer program. There was a notepad, which was convenient for sharing messages between operators. This was found to be especially useful for communication between shifts when the instruments were run throughout the extended day. There was a message log, which was the instrument's way of letting the operator know when reagents might be running low or if there was a problem with the COBAS AMPLICOR system. A system maintenance log recorded each time that the system was serviced, each daily maintenance session, and other records that could be useful in tracking performance. One of the best features of AMPLILINK was the automated calculation for quantitative tests.
Several minor problems were observed with AMPLILINK. There was no direct link with the LIS in AMPLILINK version 1.0. The only way to transfer data to a main LIS computer is indirect, by downloading data to a disk, and it will only work if the LIS will accept data in one of the AMPLILINK output formats, such as a text-only file. The printouts of quantitative results would be clearer if the raw data was printed on a page separate from the calculated data. Important messages, such as, for example, comments and instrument number, were missed on page reports, and it was not possible to create a user-defined patient identification field. Furthermore, the help access, while greatly improved, could be improved further. Finally, we found that the cassette inventory of reagents required that partially used reagents always be reused on the same instrument.
In summary, we found that AMPLILINK could conveniently operate and control one or two COBAS AMPLICOR instruments. The new software showed good overall functionality and user friendliness. The AMPLILINK operator's manual and tutorial proved very useful. Although the existing minor problems are expected to be eliminated in future versions of the software, AMPLILINK version 1.0 already represents a great improvement in the user interface with the instruments.
| |
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
|---|
This study was supported in part by a grant from Roche Molecular Systems.
We thank the automated-PCR development group at Roche Molecular Systems for support during the course of the research.
| |
FOOTNOTES |
|---|
* Corresponding author. Mailing address: Institute of Hygiene, KF-University Graz, Universitaetsplatz 4, A-8010 Graz, Austria. Phone: 43/316/380-4363. Fax: 43/316/380-9651. E-mail: harald.kessler{at}kfunigraz.ac.at.
| |
REFERENCES |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| 1. |
Albadalejo, J.,
R. Alonso,
R. Antinozzi,
M. Bogard,
A.-M. Bourgault,
G. Colucci,
T. Fenner,
H. Petersen,
E. Sala,
J. Vincelette, and C. Young.
1998.
Multicenter evaluation of the COBAS AMPLICOR HCV assay, an integrated PCR system for rapid detection of hepatitis C virus RNA in the diagnostic laboratory.
J. Clin. Microbiol.
36:862-865 |
| 2. | Bodmer, T., A. Gurtner, M. Scholkmann, and L. Matter. 1997. Evaluation of the COBAS AMPLICOR MTB system. J. Clin. Microbiol. 35:1604-1605[Abstract]. |
| 3. | Damen, M., H. T. M. Cuypers, H. W. Zaaijer, H. W. Reesink, W. P. Schaasberg, W. H. Gerlich, H. G. M. Niesters, and P. N. Lelie. 1996. International collaborative study on the second EUROHEP HCV-RNA reference panel. J. Virol. Methods 58:175-185[Medline]. |
| 4. |
DiDomenico, N.,
H. Link,
R. Knobel,
T. Caratsch,
W. Weschler,
Z. G. Loewy, and M. Rosenstraus.
1996.
COBAS AMPLICOR: fully automated RNA and DNA amplification and detection system for routine diagnostic PCR.
Clin. Chem.
42:1915-1923 |
| 5. | Goessens, W. H., J. W. Mouton, W. I. van der Meijden, S. Deelen, T. H. van Rijsoort-Vos, N. Lemmens den Toom, H. A. Verbrugh, and R. P. Verkooyen. 1997. Comparison of three commercially available amplification assays, AMP CT, LCx, and COBAS AMPLICOR, for detection of Chlamydia trachomatis in first-void urine. J. Clin. Microbiol. 35:2628-2633[Abstract]. |
| 6. | Jungkind, D., S. DiRenzo, K. G. Beavis, and N. S. Silverman. 1996. Evaluation of automated COBAS AMPLICOR PCR system for detection of several infectious agents and its impact on laboratory management. J. Clin. Microbiol. 34:2778-2783[Abstract]. |
| 7. | Kessler, H. H., E. A. Dragon, K. Pierer, B. I. Santner, Y. Liao, D. Stünzner, E. Stelzl, and E. Marth. 1997. Performance of the automated COBAS AMPLICOR system for the detection of hepatitis C virus RNA. Clin. Diagn. Virol. 7:139-145[Medline]. |
| 8. |
Rosenstraus, M.,
Z. Wang,
S.-Y. Chang,
D. DeBonville, and J. P. Spadoro.
1998.
An internal control for routine diagnostic PCR: design, properties, and effect on clinical performance.
J. Clin. Microbiol.
36:191-197 |
| 9. |
Rys, P. N., and D. H. Persing.
1993.
Preventing false positives: quantitative evaluation of three protocols for inactivation of polymerase chain reaction amplification products.
J. Clin. Microbiol.
31:2356-2360 |
| 10. | Steingrimsson, O., K. Jonsdottir, J. H. Olafsson, S. M. Karlsson, R. Palsdottir, and S. Davidsson. 1998. Comparison of Roche Cobas Amplicor and Abbott LCx for the rapid detection of Chlamydia trachomatis in specimens from high-risk patients. Sex. Transm. Dis. 25:44-48[Medline]. |
| 11. | Zaaijer, H. J., H. T. Cuypers, and H. W. Reesink. 1993. Reliability of HCV PCR results. Lancet 341:722-724[Medline]. |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Copyright © 2009 by the American Society for Microbiology. For an alternate route to Journals.ASM.org, visit: http://intl-journals.asm.org | More Info»