Cargando…

Comparative Performance of Eight PCR Methods to Detect Cryptosporidium Species

Diagnostic approaches based on PCR methods are increasingly used in the field of parasitology, particularly to detect Cryptosporidium. Consequently, many different PCR methods are available, both “in-house” and commercial methods. The aim of this study was to compare the performance of eight PCR met...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Costa, Damien, Soulieux, Louise, Razakandrainibe, Romy, Basmaciyan, Louise, Gargala, Gilles, Valot, Stéphane, Dalle, Frédéric, Favennec, Loic
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8224656/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34071125
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/pathogens10060647
_version_ 1783711933980999680
author Costa, Damien
Soulieux, Louise
Razakandrainibe, Romy
Basmaciyan, Louise
Gargala, Gilles
Valot, Stéphane
Dalle, Frédéric
Favennec, Loic
author_facet Costa, Damien
Soulieux, Louise
Razakandrainibe, Romy
Basmaciyan, Louise
Gargala, Gilles
Valot, Stéphane
Dalle, Frédéric
Favennec, Loic
author_sort Costa, Damien
collection PubMed
description Diagnostic approaches based on PCR methods are increasingly used in the field of parasitology, particularly to detect Cryptosporidium. Consequently, many different PCR methods are available, both “in-house” and commercial methods. The aim of this study was to compare the performance of eight PCR methods, four “in-house” and four commercial methods, to detect Cryptosporidium species. On the same DNA extracts, performance was evaluated regarding the limit of detection for both C. parvum and C. hominis specificity and the ability to detect rare species implicated in human infection. Results showed variations in terms of performance. The best performance was observed with the FTD(®) Stool parasites method, which detected C. parvum and C. hominis with a limit of detection of 1 and 10 oocysts/gram of stool respectively; all rare species tested were detected (C. cuniculus, C. meleagridis, C. felis, C. chipmunk, and C. ubiquitum), and no cross-reaction was observed. In addition, no cross-reactivity was observed with other enteric pathogens. However, commercial methods were unable to differentiate Cryptosporidium species, and generally, we recommend testing each DNA extract in at least triplicate to optimize the limit of detection.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8224656
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-82246562021-06-25 Comparative Performance of Eight PCR Methods to Detect Cryptosporidium Species Costa, Damien Soulieux, Louise Razakandrainibe, Romy Basmaciyan, Louise Gargala, Gilles Valot, Stéphane Dalle, Frédéric Favennec, Loic Pathogens Article Diagnostic approaches based on PCR methods are increasingly used in the field of parasitology, particularly to detect Cryptosporidium. Consequently, many different PCR methods are available, both “in-house” and commercial methods. The aim of this study was to compare the performance of eight PCR methods, four “in-house” and four commercial methods, to detect Cryptosporidium species. On the same DNA extracts, performance was evaluated regarding the limit of detection for both C. parvum and C. hominis specificity and the ability to detect rare species implicated in human infection. Results showed variations in terms of performance. The best performance was observed with the FTD(®) Stool parasites method, which detected C. parvum and C. hominis with a limit of detection of 1 and 10 oocysts/gram of stool respectively; all rare species tested were detected (C. cuniculus, C. meleagridis, C. felis, C. chipmunk, and C. ubiquitum), and no cross-reaction was observed. In addition, no cross-reactivity was observed with other enteric pathogens. However, commercial methods were unable to differentiate Cryptosporidium species, and generally, we recommend testing each DNA extract in at least triplicate to optimize the limit of detection. MDPI 2021-05-23 /pmc/articles/PMC8224656/ /pubmed/34071125 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/pathogens10060647 Text en © 2021 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Costa, Damien
Soulieux, Louise
Razakandrainibe, Romy
Basmaciyan, Louise
Gargala, Gilles
Valot, Stéphane
Dalle, Frédéric
Favennec, Loic
Comparative Performance of Eight PCR Methods to Detect Cryptosporidium Species
title Comparative Performance of Eight PCR Methods to Detect Cryptosporidium Species
title_full Comparative Performance of Eight PCR Methods to Detect Cryptosporidium Species
title_fullStr Comparative Performance of Eight PCR Methods to Detect Cryptosporidium Species
title_full_unstemmed Comparative Performance of Eight PCR Methods to Detect Cryptosporidium Species
title_short Comparative Performance of Eight PCR Methods to Detect Cryptosporidium Species
title_sort comparative performance of eight pcr methods to detect cryptosporidium species
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8224656/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34071125
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/pathogens10060647
work_keys_str_mv AT costadamien comparativeperformanceofeightpcrmethodstodetectcryptosporidiumspecies
AT soulieuxlouise comparativeperformanceofeightpcrmethodstodetectcryptosporidiumspecies
AT razakandrainiberomy comparativeperformanceofeightpcrmethodstodetectcryptosporidiumspecies
AT basmaciyanlouise comparativeperformanceofeightpcrmethodstodetectcryptosporidiumspecies
AT gargalagilles comparativeperformanceofeightpcrmethodstodetectcryptosporidiumspecies
AT valotstephane comparativeperformanceofeightpcrmethodstodetectcryptosporidiumspecies
AT dallefrederic comparativeperformanceofeightpcrmethodstodetectcryptosporidiumspecies
AT favennecloic comparativeperformanceofeightpcrmethodstodetectcryptosporidiumspecies