首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>Journal of Clinical Microbiology >Comparison of a Duplex Quantitative Real-Time PCR Assay and the COBAS Amplicor CMV Monitor Test for Detection of Cytomegalovirus
【2h】

Comparison of a Duplex Quantitative Real-Time PCR Assay and the COBAS Amplicor CMV Monitor Test for Detection of Cytomegalovirus

机译:用于定量检测巨细胞病毒的双重实时荧光定量PCR检测法和COBAS Amplicor CMV监测仪检测法的比较

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

A duplex quantitative real-time PCR (qPCR) assay was designed to detect both the polymerase gene (pol) and the glycoprotein gene (gB) of cytomegalovirus (CMV). The detection limit of the qPCR was determined to be 1 to 3 copies/reaction and the linear measure interval was 103 to 108 copies/ml. The qPCR system was compared to the COBAS Amplicor CMV Monitor test (COBAS) by an analysis of 138 plasma samples. Both systems detected CMV in 71 cases and had negative results for 33 samples. In addition, 34 samples were positive by qPCR and negative by the COBAS assay, but in no case was the COBAS result positive and the qPCR result negative. Thus, qPCR detected 48% more positive cases than the COBAS method. For samples with ≥105 copies/ml by qPCR, a saturation effect was seen in the COBAS assay and quantification required dilution. Copy numbers for pol and gB by qPCR generally agreed. However, the reproducibility of qPCR assays and the need for an international standard are discussed. Discrepant copy numbers for pol and gB by qPCR were found for samples from two patients, and sequence analysis revealed that the corresponding CMV strains were mismatched at four nucleotide positions compared with the gB fragment primer sequences. In conclusion, a duplex qPCR assay in a real-time format facilitates quantitative measurements and minimizes the risk of false-negative results.
机译:设计了双工实时荧光定量PCR(qPCR)分析,以检测巨细胞病毒(CMV)的聚合酶基因(pol)和糖蛋白基因(gB)。 qPCR的检测限为每反应1至3个拷贝,线性测量间隔为10 3 至10 8 / ml。通过分析138个血浆样品,将qPCR系统与COBAS Amplicor CMV监测仪测试(COBAS)进行了比较。两种系统均在71例病例中检测到CMV,并且对33个样本的结果均为阴性。此外,有34个样品通过qPCR呈阳性,而通过COBAS分析呈阴性,但在任何情况下COBAS结果都不为阳性,而qPCR均为阴性。因此,与COBAS方法相比,qPCR检测到的阳性病例多48%。对于通过qPCR≥10 5 拷贝/ ml的样品,在COBAS分析中看到了饱和效应,需要定量稀释。通过qPCR的pol和gB拷贝数已普遍认可。但是,讨论了qPCR分析的可重复性和对国际标准的需求。通过qPCR从两名患者的样品中发现pol和gB的拷贝数不一致,并且序列分析显示,与gB片段引物序列相比,相应的CMV菌株在四个核苷酸位置错配。总之,实时qPCR双向测定有助于定量测量,并最大程度地降低了假阴性结果的风险。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号