Chernesky M A, Jang D, Sellors J, Luinstra K, Chong S, Castriciano S, Mahony J B
McMaster University Regional Virology and Chlamydiology Laboratory and the Father Sean O'Sullivan Research Centre, St. Joseph's Hospital, Ontario, Hamilton, L8N 4A6, Canada.
Mol Cell Probes. 1997 Aug;11(4):243-9. doi: 10.1006/mcpr.1997.0109.
In a comparison of commercial ligase chain reaction (LCR; Abbott) and polymerase chain reaction (PCR; Roche) assays, measuring plasmid genes of Chlamydia trachomatis, some specimens were found to be negative by either or both assays but positive in traditional culture or antigen detection tests. Of 767 women, 35 were found to be infected by cervical or urine testing. Twenty three specimens from 16 women may have contained inhibitors in six cervical swabs (CS) and 15 first void urines (FVU). By performing dilution and 'spiking' experiments on five FVU, inhibitors of PCR, LCR or both, which disappeared by dilution, were demonstrated. Confirmatory assays were used which amplified segments of the major outer membrane gene by PCR or LCR. When comparisons of assays were made on a single specimen type, the sensitivities of the amplification assays, compared to an expanded reference standard, were as follows: on CS, PCR was 93.8% (30/32) and LCR was 96.9% (31/32); on FVU, PCR was 76.6% (23/30) and LCR was 93.3% (28/30). When a combined calculation was made to determine the ability of the assays to detect patients infected in the cervix or urethra by testing FVU, the sensitivities dropped to 71.4% (25/35) for PCR and 80.0% (28/35) for LCR: CS sensitivity was 88.6% (31/35) for both amplified tests. There were two CS and five FVU false-positives by PCR which reduced to one CS and three FVU in the combined analysis. There were no false-positives by LCR. Inhibitors and low levels of chlamydial plasmid nucleic acids may have contributed to lower than expected sensitivities, suggesting a possible need for internal positive controls, especially for PCR, when testing urine. More studies with multiple sampling and more than one amplification assay are needed to confirm these findings and to identify and remove inhibitors of amplification assays.
在一项比较商业连接酶链反应(LCR;雅培公司)和聚合酶链反应(PCR;罗氏公司)检测沙眼衣原体质粒基因的研究中,发现一些标本在这两种检测方法中一种或两种都呈阴性,但在传统培养或抗原检测试验中呈阳性。在767名女性中,通过宫颈或尿液检测发现35人感染。来自16名女性的23份标本可能在6份宫颈拭子(CS)和15份首次晨尿(FVU)中含有抑制剂。通过对5份FVU进行稀释和“加样”实验,证明了PCR、LCR或两者的抑制剂可通过稀释而消失。使用验证性检测方法,通过PCR或LCR扩增主要外膜基因片段。当对单一标本类型进行检测方法比较时,与扩展参考标准相比,扩增检测方法的灵敏度如下:在CS上,PCR为93.8%(30/32),LCR为96.9%(31/32);在FVU上,PCR为76.6%(23/30),LCR为93.3%(28/30)。当进行综合计算以确定检测方法通过检测FVU来检测宫颈或尿道感染患者的能力时,PCR的灵敏度降至71.4%(25/35),LCR为80.0%(28/35):两种扩增检测方法在CS上的灵敏度均为88.6%(31/35)。PCR有2份CS和5份FVU出现假阳性,在综合分析中分别降至1份CS和3份FVU。LCR没有假阳性。抑制剂和衣原体质粒核酸水平较低可能导致灵敏度低于预期,这表明在检测尿液时可能需要内部阳性对照,尤其是对于PCR。需要进行更多的多次采样和不止一种扩增检测方法的研究,以证实这些发现并识别和去除扩增检测方法的抑制剂。