Kann Simone, Concha Gustavo, Weinreich Felix, Hahn Andreas, Rückert Christian, Kalinowski Jörn, Landt Olfert, Frickmann Hagen
Medical Mission Institute, 97074 Würzburg, Germany.
Organization Wiwa Yugumaiun Bunkauanarrua Tayrona (OWYBT), Department Health Advocacy, Valledupar 2000001, Colombia.
Microorganisms. 2023 Mar 30;11(4):901. doi: 10.3390/microorganisms11040901.
This study was performed to comparably assess two commercial real-time PCR assays for the identification of DNA in serum. A total of 518 Colombian serum samples with high pre-test probability for infections with either or apathogenic were assessed. The assessment comprised the NDO real-time PCR (TIB MOLBIOL, ref. no. 53-0755-96, referred to as the TibMolBiol assay in the following) with specificity for and the RealStar Chagas PCR Kit 1.0 (altona DIAGNOSTICS, order no. 611013, referred to as the RealStar assay in the following) targeting a kinetoplast sequence of both and without further discrimination. To discriminate between - and -specific real-time PCR amplicons, Sanger sequencing results were available for a minority of cases with discordant real-time PCR results, while the amplicons of the remaining discordant samples were subjected to nanopore sequencing. The study assessment indicated a proportion of 18.1% (n = 94) -positive samples next to 24 samples (4.6%) containing DNA of the phylogenetically related but apathogenic parasite . The observed diagnostic accuracy as expressed by sensitivity and specificity was 97.9% (92/94) and 99.3% (421/424) with the TibMolBiol assay and 96.8% (91/94) and 95.0% (403/424) with the RealStar assay, respectively. Reduced specificity resulted from cross-reaction with in all instances (3 cross-reactions with the TibMolBiol assay and 21 cross-reactions with the RealStar assay). DNA from the six discrete typing units (DTUs) of was successfully amplified by both real-time PCR assays. In summary, both assays showed a comparable diagnostic accuracy for the diagnosis of from human serum, with a slightly higher specificity seen for the TibMolBiol assay. The pronounced co-amplification of DNA from apathogenic according to the RealStar assay may be a disadvantage in areas of co-circulation with , while the test performance of the two compared assays will be quite similar in geographic settings where infections are unlikely.
本研究旨在对两种用于鉴定血清中DNA的商业实时荧光定量PCR检测方法进行比较评估。共评估了518份哥伦比亚血清样本,这些样本在检测前感染或致病性的可能性较高。评估包括对具有特异性的NDO实时荧光定量PCR(TIB MOLBIOL,产品编号53 - 0755 - 96,以下简称TibMolBiol检测法)和针对及的动基体序列且不做进一步区分的RealStar恰加斯PCR试剂盒1.0(altona DIAGNOSTICS,订单编号611013,以下简称RealStar检测法)。为区分特异性和特异性实时荧光定量PCR扩增子,对于少数实时荧光定量PCR结果不一致的病例可获得桑格测序结果,而其余不一致样本的扩增子则进行纳米孔测序。研究评估表明,在含有系统发育相关但无致病性寄生虫DNA的24个样本(4.6%)之外,有18.1%(n = 94)的样本呈阳性。TibMolBiol检测法的敏感性和特异性所表示的观察到的诊断准确性分别为97.9%(92/94)和99.3%(421/424),RealStar检测法分别为96.8%(91/94)和95.0%(403/)。在所有情况下,特异性降低是由于与的交叉反应(TibMolBiol检测法有3次交叉反应,RealStar检测法有21次交叉反应)。两种实时荧光定量PCR检测法均成功扩增了来自六个离散型别单元(DTUs)的DNA。总之,两种检测方法在诊断人血清中的时显示出相当的诊断准确性,TibMolBiol检测法的特异性略高。根据RealStar检测法,无致病性的DNA明显共扩增,这在与共同流行的地区可能是一个缺点,而在不太可能感染的地理环境中,两种比较检测方法的检测性能将非常相似。