Suppr超能文献

三种腺病毒定量 PCR 检测方法与 ATCC 参考株和临床样本的比较。

Comparison of Three Adenovirus Quantitative PCR Assays with ATCC Reference Strains and Clinical Samples.

机构信息

Department of Laboratory Medicine, University of Washington Medical Center, Seattle, Washington, USA.

Vaccine and Infectious Diseases Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, Washington, USA.

出版信息

J Clin Microbiol. 2019 Oct 23;57(11). doi: 10.1128/JCM.00735-19. Print 2019 Nov.

Abstract

Adenoviruses (AdV) have been associated with a variety of human diseases and are recognized as causing significant morbidity and mortality in immunocompromised or transplant patients. Quantification of AdV DNA in plasma is notoriously difficult due to the genetic diversity of the 71 different serotypes identified to date. There is no World Health Organization standard available to harmonize quantitative data, so results between labs vary widely. In this study, we compared a laboratory-developed multiplex PCR assay with primers and probes specific for each group (A to G) and subgroup E4 (Octaplex) to one with a single primer and probe set (modified from N. Jothikumar et al., Appl Environ Microbiol 71:3131-3136, 2005) and one utilizing bisulfite pretreatment of DNA to reduce variation prior to amplification (Genetic Signatures). Our Octaplex assay detected all low-copy-number clinical samples, while the other two assays had subsets of samples that did not amplify. The modified Jothikumar assay failed to efficiently amplify three of the high-copy-number cultured strains, while the Genetic Signatures 3base assay had a positive bias, resulting in higher copies/ml (>0.5 log) for all culture fluids tested. All three assays resulted in endpoint detection of the available 51 AdV types. Using two different materials to generate a standard curve revealed that the Octaplex TaqMan assay and the modified Jothikumar assay both consistently gave adenovirus levels lower than the commercial platform for AdV culture fluids but not patient samples. This study highlights the differences in detection of AdV between laboratories that can be attributed to both the PCR method, as well as the reference material used for quantitation.

摘要

腺病毒(AdV)与多种人类疾病有关,被认为是导致免疫功能低下或移植患者发病率和死亡率显著增加的原因。由于迄今为止已鉴定出 71 种不同血清型的遗传多样性,因此血浆中 AdV DNA 的定量非常困难。目前尚无世界卫生组织标准来协调定量数据,因此实验室之间的结果差异很大。在这项研究中,我们将实验室开发的针对每组(A 至 G)和 E4 亚组(Octaplex)的多重 PCR 检测与一种使用单一引物和探针组(修改自 N. Jothikumar 等人,应用环境微生物学 71:3131-3136, 2005 年)和一种利用 DNA 的亚硫酸氢盐预处理来减少扩增前的变异(遗传特征)的检测进行了比较。我们的 Octaplex 检测到了所有低拷贝数的临床样本,而其他两种检测方法的部分样本没有扩增。改良的 Jothikumar 检测未能有效地扩增三种高拷贝数的培养株,而 Genetic Signatures 3base 检测存在阳性偏差,导致所有测试的培养液中的拷贝数/ml(>0.5 log)更高。所有三种检测方法都以终点检测到 51 种可用的 AdV 型。使用两种不同的材料生成标准曲线表明,Octaplex TaqMan 检测和改良的 Jothikumar 检测都一致地给出了低于商用 AdV 培养液检测平台的腺病毒水平,但对患者样本则不然。本研究强调了实验室之间在 AdV 检测方面的差异,这归因于 PCR 方法以及定量所用的参考材料。

相似文献

本文引用的文献

4
Vaccine development for human mastadenovirus.人类乳腺病毒的疫苗研发
J Thorac Dis. 2018 Jul;10(Suppl 19):S2280-S2294. doi: 10.21037/jtd.2018.03.168.
6
Applications of Digital PCR for Clinical Microbiology.数字PCR在临床微生物学中的应用。
J Clin Microbiol. 2017 Jun;55(6):1621-1628. doi: 10.1128/JCM.00211-17. Epub 2017 Mar 15.

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验