Discover Community Create You

Loading publication...

Noodle always counts identifier-free feature events for service operation. With your permission, Google Analytics can also estimate audience and engagement. Search text, publication identifiers, cookies, IP addresses and browser fingerprints are never included in Noodle's first-party event counters.

Privacy details

Article

Comparative evaluation of three commercially available methodologies for hepatitis C virus genotyping.

Journal of clinical microbiology - 1 Oct 2006

Schutzbank Ted E, Sefers Susan E, Kahmann Nicole, Li Haijing, Tang Yi-Wei

Abstract excerpt

We compared the performances of three hepatitis C virus genotyping methodologies supplied by Bayer, Abbott, and Third Wave Technologies. Genotypes were determined for 136 of 137 specimens by the Bayer method, 121 of 137 specimens by the Invader assay, and only 77 of 137 specimens by the Abbott as...

Read the complete abstract on PubMed

Topics

Share this publication in a Topic to start or enrich a Post.

Share to Genotype
Share to Hepacivirus
Share to Molecular Probe Techniques

Methodology Data sources Editorial policy Privacy About Contact Helena Bioinformatics

Share to Nucleic Acid Amplification Techniques

Share to Reagent Kits, Diagnostic

Share to Sensitivity and Specificity

Source

Open in PubMed Open full text

Identifiers

PMID: 17021114
DOI: 10.1128/JCM.01159-06
PMCID: PMC1594808

Provenance

PubMed metadata and Literature Corpus relationships. Corpus snapshot updated 2 Sept 2026. Prepared record publication-17021114-2026-09-02.2. Manifest publication-graph-cohort-2026-09-02.2.

Source receipt: PubMed via Helena Literature Corpus, retrieved 2 Sept 2026.

Related research

Semantic proximity does not establish scientific evidence.

Research trail→

Click a neighbor to travelStep 1 · 12 closest

Comparative evaluation of three commercially available methodologies for hepatitis C virus genotyping.PMID 17021114Read ↗

Routine detection and quantification of hepatitis B virus DNA in clinical laboratories: performance of three commercial assaysSemantic proximity Read ↗

Performance of the Abbott RealTime and Roche Cobas TaqMan hepatitis C virus (HCV) assays for quantification of HCV genotypes.Semantic proximity Read ↗

Comparison of Abbott RealTime HCV Genotype II with Versant Line Probe Assay 2.0 for Hepatitis C Virus GenotypingSemantic proximity Read ↗

Application of six hepatitis C virus genotyping systems to sera from chronic hepatitis C patients in the United States.Semantic proximity Read ↗

Evaluation of the Abbott investigational use only RealTime hepatitis C virus (HCV) assay and comparison to the Roche TaqMan HCV analyte-specific reagent assay.Semantic proximity Read ↗

[Comparison of three genotyping methods for hepatitis B virus].Semantic proximity Read ↗

Performance Characteristics and Comparison of Abbott and artus Real-Time Systems for Hepatitis B Virus DNA QuantificationSemantic proximity Read ↗

Comparative performance of two commercial sample-to-result systems for hepatitis C virus quantitation and genotyping.Semantic proximity Read ↗

A comparative evaluation between real time Roche COBas TAQMAN 48 HCV and bDNA Bayer Versant HCV 3.0.Semantic proximity Read ↗

Multilaboratory comparison of hepatitis C virus viral load assays.Semantic proximity Read ↗

Evaluation of the invader assay for genotyping hepatitis C virus.Semantic proximity Read ↗

Evaluation of the COBAS Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) TaqMan analyte-specific reagent assay and comparison to the COBAS Amplicor HCV Monitor V2.0 and Versant HCV bDNA 3.0 assays.Semantic proximity Read ↗

⌁Select a neighboring publication to make it the new centre.