Table 2.
Qualitative analysis of the four HEV strains
| Virus strain (genotype) | Nominal concn (log10 copies/ml) | % positivea |
|---|---|---|
| HRC-HE104 (3a) | 6.2 | 96 |
| 5.2 | 96 | |
| 4.2 | 92/88 | |
| 3.2 | 75/67 | |
| 2.2 | 38/25 | |
| 1.2 | 13/8 | |
| JRC-HE3 (3b) | 6.4 | 96 |
| 5.4 | 92 | |
| 4.4 | 92/88 | |
| 3.4 | 75/67 | |
| 2.4 | 58/33 | |
| 1.4 | 21/9 | |
| RKI (3f) | 5.1 | 92 |
| 4.1 | 75/71 | |
| 3.1 | 71/63 | |
| 2.1 | 33/25 | |
| 1.1 | 4 | |
| HRC-HE15 (4c) | 5.0 | 92/88 |
| 4.0 | 83 | |
| 3.0 | 50/38 | |
| 2.0 | 33/25 | |
| 1.0b | 4/0 |
a
For the number of positive test results, a best-case/worst-case percentage is reported for results reported as being simply positive or equivocal.
b
Data were returned for a total number of 24 tests for each sample. However, in the case of sample 22 (genotype 4c), a false-positive result (as evidenced by the detection of an HEV genotype not represented in the panel) was reported by one laboratory and was not included during the calculation of percent positive results. A breakdown of the original data is shown in Tables S2 to S5 in the supplemental material.