MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415013875 · doi:10.1016/j.jcv.2025.105879

Utility of cytomegalovirus (CMV) qualitative polymerase chain reaction from gastrointestinal biopsies in diagnosis of CMV gastrointestinal disease: A 10-year retrospective study

2025· article· en· W4415013875 on OpenAlexaff
Cole Schonhofer, Calvin Ka-Fung Lo, Daniel R Owen, Khuloud Aldhaheri, Nancy Matic, Christopher F. Lowe, David F. Schaeffer, Sara Belga, Alissa Wright

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Virology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCytomegalovirus and herpesvirus research
Canadian institutionsVancouver General HospitalSt. Paul's HospitalProvidence Health CareUniversity of British Columbia
FundersTakeda Pharmaceutical Company
KeywordsCytomegalovirusPolymerase chain reactionBetaherpesvirinaeRetrospective cohort studyReal-time polymerase chain reactionViral diseaseDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cytomegalovirus (CMV) gastrointestinal (GI) disease is traditionally diagnosed via histopathology of endoscopic tissue biopsies. The utility of tissue PCR for predicting CMV GI disease remains unclear. We conducted a 10-year retrospective single-center study comparing tissue PCR performance to histopathology for the diagnosis of CMV GI disease. Adult patients with GI tissue biopsy between February 2014 and January 2024 were included. Qualitative tissue PCR was compared to histopathology (gold standard) to determine sensitivity, specificity, and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves. Log-binomial regression models were performed to evaluate potential predictors of CMV GI disease. Our study comprised 533 patients with 635 endoscopies. Underlying diagnoses included solid organ transplant, hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT), inflammatory bowel disease, and others. Histopathologic evidence of CMV disease was found in 41/635 biopsies and in 37/533 patients. Compared to histopathology, tissue PCR sensitivity was 100% (95% CI 91.4–100%), and specificity was 71.7% (67.9–75.3%). Area under ROC curve (AUC) was 0.86 (0.84–0.88). Exclusion of specimens with cycle threshold >32 increased specificity to 82.7% (79.4-85.6%) but at the cost of decreased sensitivity (87.8%, 73.8–95.9%). Multivariable analyses demonstrated that plasma CMV DNAemia >1000 IU/mL increased risk of GI disease (risk ratio 10.9, 95% CI 5.32–22.49) while HSCT was negatively associated (risk ratio 0.18, 95% 0.05–0.78). CMV tissue PCR correctly identified CMV GI disease in 100% of histology-proven cases. Specificity was poor, likely reflecting detection of viral shedding. Overall, our study suggests that CMV tissue PCR should be reserved to rule out CMV GI disease in high pre-test probability settings (e.g. patients with known risk factors and compatible symptoms). • The utility of tissue PCR for predicting CMV gastrointestinal (GI) disease remains unclear. • Qualitative CMV tissue PCR was evaluated compared to the gold standard of histopathology for endoscopic tissue specimens from 533 patients. • Compared to histopathology, CMV tissue PCR has excellent sensitivity (100%) but poor specificity below 75% and very low positive predictive value • CMV GI disease was strongly associated with peripheral CMV viral loads > 1000 IU/mL • We suggest that tissue PCR should only be used clinically to rule out CMV GI disease in high pre-test probability settings (e.g. patients with known risk factors and compatible symptoms)

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.034
Threshold uncertainty score0.990

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.080
GPT teacher head0.453
Teacher spread0.373 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical VirologySame topicCytomegalovirus and herpesvirus researchFrench-language works237,207