Lasker Brent A
Mycotic Diseases Branch, Division of Bacterial and Mycotic Diseases, National Centers for Infectious Diseases, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia 30333, USA.
J Clin Microbiol. 2002 Aug;40(8):2886-92. doi: 10.1128/JCM.40.8.2886-2892.2002.
In the present investigation, 49 Aspergillus fumigatus isolates obtained from four nosocomial outbreaks were typed by Afut1 restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) analysis and three PCR-based molecular typing methods: random amplified polymorphic DNA (RAPD) analysis, sequence-specific DNA primer (SSDP) analysis, and polymorphic microsatellite markers (PMM) analysis. The typing methods were evaluated with respect to discriminatory power (D), reproducibility, typeability, ease of use, and ease of interpretation to determine their performance and utility for outbreak and surveillance investigations. Afut1 RFLP analysis detected 40 types. Thirty types were observed by RAPD analysis. PMM analysis detected 39 allelic types, but SSDP analysis detected only 14 types. All four methods demonstrated 100% typeability. PMM and RFLP analyses had comparable high degrees of discriminatory power (D = 0.989 and 0.988, respectively). The discriminatory power of RAPD analysis was slightly lower (D = 0.971), whereas SSDP analysis had the lowest discriminatory power (D = 0.889). Overall, SSDP analysis was the easiest method to interpret and perform. The profiles obtained by PMM analysis were easier to interpret than those obtained by RFLP or RAPD analysis. Bands that differed in staining intensity or that were of low intensity were observed by RAPD analysis, making interpretation more difficult. The reproducibilities with repeated runs of the same DNA preparation or with different DNA preparations of the same strain were high for all the methods. A high degree of genetic variation was observed in the test population, but isolates were not always similarly divided by each method. Interpretation of band profiles requires understanding of the molecular mechanisms responsible for genetic alternations. PMM analysis and Afut1 RFLP analysis, or their combination, appear to provide the best overall discriminatory power, reproducibility, ease of interpretation, and ease of use. This investigation will aid in planning epidemiologic and surveillance studies of A. fumigatus.
在本研究中,对从四起医院感染暴发中分离得到的49株烟曲霉进行了分型,采用了Afut1限制性片段长度多态性(RFLP)分析以及三种基于聚合酶链反应(PCR)的分子分型方法:随机扩增多态性DNA(RAPD)分析、序列特异性DNA引物(SSDP)分析和多态性微卫星标记(PMM)分析。从分辨能力(D)、重复性、分型能力、易用性和易解释性等方面对这些分型方法进行了评估,以确定它们在暴发调查和监测研究中的性能及实用性。Afut1 RFLP分析检测到40种类型。RAPD分析观察到30种类型。PMM分析检测到39个等位基因类型,但SSDP分析仅检测到14种类型。所有四种方法的分型能力均为100%。PMM和RFLP分析具有相当高的分辨能力(分辨能力分别为0.989和0.988)。RAPD分析的分辨能力略低(D = 0.971),而SSDP分析的分辨能力最低(D = 0.889)。总体而言,SSDP分析是最易于解释和操作的方法。PMM分析得到的图谱比RFLP或RAPD分析得到的图谱更易于解释。RAPD分析观察到染色强度不同或强度较低的条带,这使得解释更加困难。所有方法对同一DNA制剂重复检测或对同一菌株的不同DNA制剂检测时,重复性都很高。在测试群体中观察到高度的基因变异,但各方法对分离株的划分并不总是一致。条带图谱的解释需要了解导致基因改变的分子机制。PMM分析和Afut1 RFLP分析或二者结合,似乎能提供最佳的总体分辨能力、重复性、易解释性和易用性。本研究将有助于规划烟曲霉的流行病学和监测研究。