Cargando…
Tenfold difference in DNA recovery rate: systematic comparison of whole blood vs. dried blood spot sample collection for malaria molecular surveillance
BACKGROUND: Molecular and genomic surveillance is becoming increasingly used to track malaria control and elimination efforts. Blood samples can be collected as whole blood and stored at − 20 °C until DNA extraction, or as dried blood spots (DBS), circumventing the need for a cold chain. Despite the...
Autores principales: | , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8922754/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35292038 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12936-022-04122-9 |
_version_ | 1784669557542092800 |
---|---|
author | Holzschuh, Aurel Koepfli, Cristian |
author_facet | Holzschuh, Aurel Koepfli, Cristian |
author_sort | Holzschuh, Aurel |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Molecular and genomic surveillance is becoming increasingly used to track malaria control and elimination efforts. Blood samples can be collected as whole blood and stored at − 20 °C until DNA extraction, or as dried blood spots (DBS), circumventing the need for a cold chain. Despite the wide use of either method, systematic comparisons of how the method of blood sample preservation affects the limit of detection (LOD) of molecular diagnosis and the proportion of DNA recovered for downstream applications are lacking. METHODS: Extractions based on spin columns, magnetic beads, Tween-Chelex, and direct PCR without prior extraction were compared for whole blood and dried blood spots (DBS) using dilution series of Plasmodium falciparum culture samples. Extracted DNA was quantified by qPCR and droplet digital PCR (ddPCR). RESULTS: DNA recovery was 5- to 10-fold higher for whole blood compared to DBS, resulting in a 2- to 3-fold lower LOD for both extraction methods compared to DBS. For whole blood, a magnetic bead-based method resulted in a DNA recovery rate of 88–98% when extracting from whole blood compared to 17–33% for a spin-column based method. For extractions from DBS, the magnetic bead-based method resulted in 8–20% DNA recovery, while the spin-column based method resulted in only 2% DNA recovery. The Tween-Chelex method was superior to other methods with 15–21% DNA recovery, and even more sensitive than extractions from whole blood samples. The direct PCR method was found to have the lowest LOD overall for both, whole blood and DBS. CONCLUSIONS: Pronounced differences in LOD and DNA yield need to be considered when comparing prevalence estimates based on molecular methods and when selecting sampling protocols for other molecular surveillance applications. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12936-022-04122-9. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8922754 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-89227542022-03-22 Tenfold difference in DNA recovery rate: systematic comparison of whole blood vs. dried blood spot sample collection for malaria molecular surveillance Holzschuh, Aurel Koepfli, Cristian Malar J Methodology BACKGROUND: Molecular and genomic surveillance is becoming increasingly used to track malaria control and elimination efforts. Blood samples can be collected as whole blood and stored at − 20 °C until DNA extraction, or as dried blood spots (DBS), circumventing the need for a cold chain. Despite the wide use of either method, systematic comparisons of how the method of blood sample preservation affects the limit of detection (LOD) of molecular diagnosis and the proportion of DNA recovered for downstream applications are lacking. METHODS: Extractions based on spin columns, magnetic beads, Tween-Chelex, and direct PCR without prior extraction were compared for whole blood and dried blood spots (DBS) using dilution series of Plasmodium falciparum culture samples. Extracted DNA was quantified by qPCR and droplet digital PCR (ddPCR). RESULTS: DNA recovery was 5- to 10-fold higher for whole blood compared to DBS, resulting in a 2- to 3-fold lower LOD for both extraction methods compared to DBS. For whole blood, a magnetic bead-based method resulted in a DNA recovery rate of 88–98% when extracting from whole blood compared to 17–33% for a spin-column based method. For extractions from DBS, the magnetic bead-based method resulted in 8–20% DNA recovery, while the spin-column based method resulted in only 2% DNA recovery. The Tween-Chelex method was superior to other methods with 15–21% DNA recovery, and even more sensitive than extractions from whole blood samples. The direct PCR method was found to have the lowest LOD overall for both, whole blood and DBS. CONCLUSIONS: Pronounced differences in LOD and DNA yield need to be considered when comparing prevalence estimates based on molecular methods and when selecting sampling protocols for other molecular surveillance applications. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12936-022-04122-9. BioMed Central 2022-03-15 /pmc/articles/PMC8922754/ /pubmed/35292038 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12936-022-04122-9 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 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 | Methodology Holzschuh, Aurel Koepfli, Cristian Tenfold difference in DNA recovery rate: systematic comparison of whole blood vs. dried blood spot sample collection for malaria molecular surveillance |
title | Tenfold difference in DNA recovery rate: systematic comparison of whole blood vs. dried blood spot sample collection for malaria molecular surveillance |
title_full | Tenfold difference in DNA recovery rate: systematic comparison of whole blood vs. dried blood spot sample collection for malaria molecular surveillance |
title_fullStr | Tenfold difference in DNA recovery rate: systematic comparison of whole blood vs. dried blood spot sample collection for malaria molecular surveillance |
title_full_unstemmed | Tenfold difference in DNA recovery rate: systematic comparison of whole blood vs. dried blood spot sample collection for malaria molecular surveillance |
title_short | Tenfold difference in DNA recovery rate: systematic comparison of whole blood vs. dried blood spot sample collection for malaria molecular surveillance |
title_sort | tenfold difference in dna recovery rate: systematic comparison of whole blood vs. dried blood spot sample collection for malaria molecular surveillance |
topic | Methodology |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8922754/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35292038 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12936-022-04122-9 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT holzschuhaurel tenfolddifferenceindnarecoveryratesystematiccomparisonofwholebloodvsdriedbloodspotsamplecollectionformalariamolecularsurveillance AT koepflicristian tenfolddifferenceindnarecoveryratesystematiccomparisonofwholebloodvsdriedbloodspotsamplecollectionformalariamolecularsurveillance |