Cargando…

Evaluation of different DNA extraction methods and loop-mediated isothermal amplification primers for the detection of Mycobacterium ulcerans in clinical specimens

BACKGROUND: Early diagnosis and treatment of Buruli ulcer is critical in order to avoid the debilitating effects of the disease. In this regard, the development of new diagnostic and point of care tools is encouraged. The loop-mediated isothermal amplification for the detection of Mycobacterium ulce...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ablordey, Anthony, Ahotor, Evans, Narh, Charles A., King, Sandra A., Cruz, Isra, Ndung’u, Joseph M., de Souza, Dziedzom K.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8220662/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34162342
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12879-021-06308-z
_version_ 1783711189977530368
author Ablordey, Anthony
Ahotor, Evans
Narh, Charles A.
King, Sandra A.
Cruz, Isra
Ndung’u, Joseph M.
de Souza, Dziedzom K.
author_facet Ablordey, Anthony
Ahotor, Evans
Narh, Charles A.
King, Sandra A.
Cruz, Isra
Ndung’u, Joseph M.
de Souza, Dziedzom K.
author_sort Ablordey, Anthony
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Early diagnosis and treatment of Buruli ulcer is critical in order to avoid the debilitating effects of the disease. In this regard, the development of new diagnostic and point of care tools is encouraged. The loop-mediated isothermal amplification for the detection of Mycobacterium ulcerans represents one of the new tools with a good potential of being developed into a point of care test. There is however the need to standardize the assays, reduce sample preparation times, improve the detection/visualization system and optimize them for high-throughput screening, adaptable to low resourced laboratories. METHODS: In this study, we assessed two DNA extraction protocols (modified Boom and EasyNAT methods), three previously published LAMP primer sets (BURULI, MU 2404 and BU-LAMP), and compared the sensitivity and specificity of LAMP assays on three DNA amplification platforms. RESULTS: Our results show that Buruli ulcer diagnosis using primers targeting IS2404 for the LAMP method is sensitive (73.75–91.49%), depending on the DNA extraction method used. Even though the modified Boom DNA extraction method provided the best results, its instrumentation requirement prevent it from being field applicable. The EasyNAT method on the other hand is simpler and may represent the best method for DNA extraction in less resourced settings. CONCLUSIONS: For further work on the development and use of LAMP tests for Buruli diagnosis, it is recommended that the BURULI sets of primers be used, as these yielded the best results in terms of sensitivity (87.50–91.49%) and specificity (89.23–100%), depending on the DNA extraction methods used.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8220662
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-82206622021-06-23 Evaluation of different DNA extraction methods and loop-mediated isothermal amplification primers for the detection of Mycobacterium ulcerans in clinical specimens Ablordey, Anthony Ahotor, Evans Narh, Charles A. King, Sandra A. Cruz, Isra Ndung’u, Joseph M. de Souza, Dziedzom K. BMC Infect Dis Research Article BACKGROUND: Early diagnosis and treatment of Buruli ulcer is critical in order to avoid the debilitating effects of the disease. In this regard, the development of new diagnostic and point of care tools is encouraged. The loop-mediated isothermal amplification for the detection of Mycobacterium ulcerans represents one of the new tools with a good potential of being developed into a point of care test. There is however the need to standardize the assays, reduce sample preparation times, improve the detection/visualization system and optimize them for high-throughput screening, adaptable to low resourced laboratories. METHODS: In this study, we assessed two DNA extraction protocols (modified Boom and EasyNAT methods), three previously published LAMP primer sets (BURULI, MU 2404 and BU-LAMP), and compared the sensitivity and specificity of LAMP assays on three DNA amplification platforms. RESULTS: Our results show that Buruli ulcer diagnosis using primers targeting IS2404 for the LAMP method is sensitive (73.75–91.49%), depending on the DNA extraction method used. Even though the modified Boom DNA extraction method provided the best results, its instrumentation requirement prevent it from being field applicable. The EasyNAT method on the other hand is simpler and may represent the best method for DNA extraction in less resourced settings. CONCLUSIONS: For further work on the development and use of LAMP tests for Buruli diagnosis, it is recommended that the BURULI sets of primers be used, as these yielded the best results in terms of sensitivity (87.50–91.49%) and specificity (89.23–100%), depending on the DNA extraction methods used. BioMed Central 2021-06-23 /pmc/articles/PMC8220662/ /pubmed/34162342 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12879-021-06308-z Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research Article
Ablordey, Anthony
Ahotor, Evans
Narh, Charles A.
King, Sandra A.
Cruz, Isra
Ndung’u, Joseph M.
de Souza, Dziedzom K.
Evaluation of different DNA extraction methods and loop-mediated isothermal amplification primers for the detection of Mycobacterium ulcerans in clinical specimens
title Evaluation of different DNA extraction methods and loop-mediated isothermal amplification primers for the detection of Mycobacterium ulcerans in clinical specimens
title_full Evaluation of different DNA extraction methods and loop-mediated isothermal amplification primers for the detection of Mycobacterium ulcerans in clinical specimens
title_fullStr Evaluation of different DNA extraction methods and loop-mediated isothermal amplification primers for the detection of Mycobacterium ulcerans in clinical specimens
title_full_unstemmed Evaluation of different DNA extraction methods and loop-mediated isothermal amplification primers for the detection of Mycobacterium ulcerans in clinical specimens
title_short Evaluation of different DNA extraction methods and loop-mediated isothermal amplification primers for the detection of Mycobacterium ulcerans in clinical specimens
title_sort evaluation of different dna extraction methods and loop-mediated isothermal amplification primers for the detection of mycobacterium ulcerans in clinical specimens
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8220662/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34162342
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12879-021-06308-z
work_keys_str_mv AT ablordeyanthony evaluationofdifferentdnaextractionmethodsandloopmediatedisothermalamplificationprimersforthedetectionofmycobacteriumulceransinclinicalspecimens
AT ahotorevans evaluationofdifferentdnaextractionmethodsandloopmediatedisothermalamplificationprimersforthedetectionofmycobacteriumulceransinclinicalspecimens
AT narhcharlesa evaluationofdifferentdnaextractionmethodsandloopmediatedisothermalamplificationprimersforthedetectionofmycobacteriumulceransinclinicalspecimens
AT kingsandraa evaluationofdifferentdnaextractionmethodsandloopmediatedisothermalamplificationprimersforthedetectionofmycobacteriumulceransinclinicalspecimens
AT cruzisra evaluationofdifferentdnaextractionmethodsandloopmediatedisothermalamplificationprimersforthedetectionofmycobacteriumulceransinclinicalspecimens
AT ndungujosephm evaluationofdifferentdnaextractionmethodsandloopmediatedisothermalamplificationprimersforthedetectionofmycobacteriumulceransinclinicalspecimens
AT desouzadziedzomk evaluationofdifferentdnaextractionmethodsandloopmediatedisothermalamplificationprimersforthedetectionofmycobacteriumulceransinclinicalspecimens