Cargando…
Comparison of 9 different PCR primers for the rapid detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus using 2 RNA extraction methods
The sensitivity and specificity of various severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) PCR primer and probe sets were evaluated through the use of commercial kits and in-house amplification formats. Conventional and real-time PCR assays were performed using a heat-block thermocycler ABI...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Elsevier Inc.
2005
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7125917/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15994050 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.diagmicrobio.2005.03.007 |
_version_ | 1783516046534115328 |
---|---|
author | Chui, Linda Drebot, Michael Andonov, Anton Petrich, Astrid Glushek, Martin Mahony, James |
author_facet | Chui, Linda Drebot, Michael Andonov, Anton Petrich, Astrid Glushek, Martin Mahony, James |
author_sort | Chui, Linda |
collection | PubMed |
description | The sensitivity and specificity of various severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) PCR primer and probe sets were evaluated through the use of commercial kits and in-house amplification formats. Conventional and real-time PCR assays were performed using a heat-block thermocycler ABI 9600, the Roche LightCycler™ version 1.2, or the ABI 7000 Sequence Detection System. The sensitivity of all primers was between 0.0004 and 0.04 PFU with viral cell lysate and between 0.004 and 0.4 PFU in spiked stool specimen per PCR assay. The primer sets for real-time PCR assays were at one least 1 log more sensitive than the primer sets used in the conventional PCR. A panel of viruses including swine gastroenteritis virus, bovine coronavirus, avian bronchitis virus (Connecticut strain), avian bronchitis virus (Massachusetts strain), human coronaviruses 229E and OC43, parainfluenza virus (type III), human metapneumovirus, adenovirus, respiratory syncytial virus, and influenza A were tested by all assays. All real-time PCR assays used probe-based detection, and no cross-reactivity was observed. With conventional PCR, analysis was performed using agarose gel electrophoresis and multiple nonspecific bands were observed. Two commercial extraction methods, magnetic particle capture and silica-based procedure were evaluated and the results were comparable. The former was less laborious with shorter time for completion and can easily be adapted to an automated system such as the MagNa Pure-LC, which can extract nucleic acid from clinical samples and load it into the sample capillaries of the LightCycler™. As exemplified by this study, the continued refinement and evaluation of PCR procedures will greatly benefit the diagnostic laboratory during an outbreak of SARS. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7125917 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2005 |
publisher | Elsevier Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-71259172020-04-08 Comparison of 9 different PCR primers for the rapid detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus using 2 RNA extraction methods Chui, Linda Drebot, Michael Andonov, Anton Petrich, Astrid Glushek, Martin Mahony, James Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis Article The sensitivity and specificity of various severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) PCR primer and probe sets were evaluated through the use of commercial kits and in-house amplification formats. Conventional and real-time PCR assays were performed using a heat-block thermocycler ABI 9600, the Roche LightCycler™ version 1.2, or the ABI 7000 Sequence Detection System. The sensitivity of all primers was between 0.0004 and 0.04 PFU with viral cell lysate and between 0.004 and 0.4 PFU in spiked stool specimen per PCR assay. The primer sets for real-time PCR assays were at one least 1 log more sensitive than the primer sets used in the conventional PCR. A panel of viruses including swine gastroenteritis virus, bovine coronavirus, avian bronchitis virus (Connecticut strain), avian bronchitis virus (Massachusetts strain), human coronaviruses 229E and OC43, parainfluenza virus (type III), human metapneumovirus, adenovirus, respiratory syncytial virus, and influenza A were tested by all assays. All real-time PCR assays used probe-based detection, and no cross-reactivity was observed. With conventional PCR, analysis was performed using agarose gel electrophoresis and multiple nonspecific bands were observed. Two commercial extraction methods, magnetic particle capture and silica-based procedure were evaluated and the results were comparable. The former was less laborious with shorter time for completion and can easily be adapted to an automated system such as the MagNa Pure-LC, which can extract nucleic acid from clinical samples and load it into the sample capillaries of the LightCycler™. As exemplified by this study, the continued refinement and evaluation of PCR procedures will greatly benefit the diagnostic laboratory during an outbreak of SARS. Elsevier Inc. 2005-09 2005-07-01 /pmc/articles/PMC7125917/ /pubmed/15994050 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.diagmicrobio.2005.03.007 Text en Copyright © 2005 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. Since January 2020 Elsevier has created a COVID-19 resource centre with free information in English and Mandarin on the novel coronavirus COVID-19. The COVID-19 resource centre is hosted on Elsevier Connect, the company's public news and information website. Elsevier hereby grants permission to make all its COVID-19-related research that is available on the COVID-19 resource centre - including this research content - immediately available in PubMed Central and other publicly funded repositories, such as the WHO COVID database with rights for unrestricted research re-use and analyses in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for free by Elsevier for as long as the COVID-19 resource centre remains active. |
spellingShingle | Article Chui, Linda Drebot, Michael Andonov, Anton Petrich, Astrid Glushek, Martin Mahony, James Comparison of 9 different PCR primers for the rapid detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus using 2 RNA extraction methods |
title | Comparison of 9 different PCR primers for the rapid detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus using 2 RNA extraction methods |
title_full | Comparison of 9 different PCR primers for the rapid detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus using 2 RNA extraction methods |
title_fullStr | Comparison of 9 different PCR primers for the rapid detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus using 2 RNA extraction methods |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of 9 different PCR primers for the rapid detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus using 2 RNA extraction methods |
title_short | Comparison of 9 different PCR primers for the rapid detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus using 2 RNA extraction methods |
title_sort | comparison of 9 different pcr primers for the rapid detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus using 2 rna extraction methods |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7125917/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15994050 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.diagmicrobio.2005.03.007 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT chuilinda comparisonof9differentpcrprimersfortherapiddetectionofsevereacuterespiratorysyndromecoronavirususing2rnaextractionmethods AT drebotmichael comparisonof9differentpcrprimersfortherapiddetectionofsevereacuterespiratorysyndromecoronavirususing2rnaextractionmethods AT andonovanton comparisonof9differentpcrprimersfortherapiddetectionofsevereacuterespiratorysyndromecoronavirususing2rnaextractionmethods AT petrichastrid comparisonof9differentpcrprimersfortherapiddetectionofsevereacuterespiratorysyndromecoronavirususing2rnaextractionmethods AT glushekmartin comparisonof9differentpcrprimersfortherapiddetectionofsevereacuterespiratorysyndromecoronavirususing2rnaextractionmethods AT mahonyjames comparisonof9differentpcrprimersfortherapiddetectionofsevereacuterespiratorysyndromecoronavirususing2rnaextractionmethods |