Diagnostic Systems Division, United States Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases, Fort Detrick, Maryland, United States of America.
PLoS One. 2013 Sep 9;8(9):e73845. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0073845. eCollection 2013.
Polymerase chain reaction (PCR) is commonly used for pathogen detection in clinical and environmental samples. These sample matrices often contain inhibitors of PCR, which is a primary reason for sample processing; however, the purification process is highly inefficient, becoming unacceptable at lower signature concentrations. One potential solution is direct PCR assessment without sample processing. Here, we evaluated nine inhibitor-resistant PCR reagents for direct detection of Francisella tularensis in seven different clinical and environmental samples using an established real-time PCR assay to assess ability to overcome PCR inhibition. While several of these reagents were designed for standard PCR, the described inhibitor resistant properties (ex. Omni Klentaq can amplify target DNA samples of up to 20% whole blood or soil) led to our evaluation with real-time PCR. A preliminary limit of detection (LOD) was determined for each chemistry in whole blood and buffer, and LODs (20 replicates) were determined for the top five chemistries in each matrix (buffer, whole blood, sputum, stool, swab, soil, and sand). Not surprisingly, no single chemistry performed the best across all of the different matrices evaluated. For instance, Phusion Blood Direct PCR Kit, Phire Hot Start DNA polymerase, and Phire Hot Start DNA polymerase with STR Boost performed best for direct detection in whole blood while Phire Hot Start DNA polymerase with STR Boost were the only reagents to yield an LOD in the femtogram range for soil. Although not the best performer across all matrices, KAPA Blood PCR kit produced the most consistent results among the various conditions assessed. Overall, while these inhibitor resistant reagents show promise for direct amplification of complex samples by real-time PCR, the amount of template required for detection would not be in a clinically relevant range for most matrices.
聚合酶链式反应(PCR)常用于临床和环境样本中的病原体检测。这些样本基质通常含有 PCR 抑制剂,这是进行样本处理的主要原因;然而,纯化过程效率低下,在较低的特征浓度下变得不可接受。一种潜在的解决方案是无需样本处理即可直接进行 PCR 评估。在这里,我们使用建立的实时 PCR 检测评估了九种抗抑制剂 PCR 试剂在七种不同临床和环境样本中对土拉弗朗西斯菌的直接检测能力,以评估其克服 PCR 抑制的能力。虽然这些试剂中的几种是为标准 PCR 设计的,但所描述的抗抑制剂特性(例如 Omni Klentaq 可以扩增高达 20%全血或土壤的目标 DNA 样本)导致我们用实时 PCR 进行评估。在全血和缓冲液中确定了每种化学物质的初步检测限(LOD),并在每种基质(缓冲液、全血、痰、粪便、拭子、土壤和沙子)中确定了前五种化学物质的 LOD(20 个重复)。毫不奇怪,没有一种化学物质在所有评估的不同基质中表现最好。例如,Phusion Blood Direct PCR 试剂盒、Phire Hot Start DNA 聚合酶和带有 STR Boost 的 Phire Hot Start DNA 聚合酶在全血中的直接检测效果最好,而只有带有 STR Boost 的 Phire Hot Start DNA 聚合酶能够在土壤中达到飞克级的 LOD。尽管在所有基质中不是表现最好的,但 KAPA Blood PCR 试剂盒在评估的各种条件下产生了最一致的结果。总的来说,虽然这些抗抑制剂试剂显示出通过实时 PCR 直接扩增复杂样本的潜力,但对于大多数基质,检测所需的模板量不会处于临床相关范围内。