首页> 外文期刊>Journal of Clinical Microbiology >Comparative study of three methods for genotyping hepatitis C virus strains in samples from Spanish patients.
【24h】

Comparative study of three methods for genotyping hepatitis C virus strains in samples from Spanish patients.

机译:对西班牙患者样本中的丙型肝炎病毒株进行基因分型的三种方法的比较研究。

获取原文
           

摘要

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) genotypes may be investigated by a variety of laboratory methods that target different parts of the HCV genome and have various degrees of technical difficulty. Since the choice of a particular method is difficult, we compared the performance of (i) a type-specific PCR with type-specific primers from the core region, (ii) molecular hybridization of the PCR-amplified 5' noncoding region to type-specific probes, and (iii) identification of type-specific antibodies against epitopes of nonstructural region 4 by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). One hundred fifty-one patients with biopsy-proved chronic hepatitis and HCV RNA in serum were investigated. The HCV genotype was identified in 99%, 100%, and 85% of the cases by type-specific PCR, probe hybridization, and ELISA, respectively. The type-specific PCR disclosed infection with type 1a in 3%, type 1b in 74%, and type 3a in 4% of the cases and suggested infection with two or more HCV types, including 2a/2c and 2b, in the remaining 18%. Apparently mixed infections were more prevalent in patients with past intravenous drug use (P < 0.001), but cloning and sequencing of PCR products did not confirm a mixed infection in any of the four cases investigated. Concordant results were obtained by the three procedures with virtually all of the samples in which the type-specific PCR revealed a single HCV genotype. Type-specific hybridization and ELISA usually recognized the genotype producing the strongest DNA band in samples in which type-specific PCR suggested a mixed infection. In conclusion, the three procedures evaluated in this study are reliable for investigation of HCV genotype. Type-specific PCR provides information about HCV subtypes, but a mixed infection detected with this method should be interpreted with caution.
机译:可以通过针对HCV基因组不同部分的多种实验室方法研究丙型肝炎病毒(HCV)基因型,并具有不同程度的技术难度。由于选择特定方法很困难,因此我们比较了(i)类型特异性PCR与来自核心区域的类型特异性引物的性能,(ii)PCR扩增的5'非编码区与类型-特异性探针,以及(iii)通过酶联免疫吸附测定(ELISA)鉴定针对非结构性区域4表位的类型特异性抗体。对151例经活检证实的慢性肝炎和血清中HCV RNA的患者进行了调查。通过类型特异性PCR,探针杂交和ELISA分别鉴定出HCV基因型,分别占99%,100%和85%。特异性PCR显示4%的病例中1%为1a型,74%为1b型和3a型感染,其余18种建议感染两种或更多种HCV,包括2a / 2c和2b。 %。在过去使用静脉药物的患者中,混合感染显然更为普遍(P <0.001),但在所研究的四例病例中,PCR产物的克隆和测序均未证实混合感染。通过这三个步骤,几乎对所有样品(其类型特异性PCR都显示单个HCV基因型)都获得了一致的结果。类型特异性杂交和ELISA通常识别在样本中产生最强DNA条带的基因型,其中类型特异性PCR提示混合感染。总之,在这项研究中评估的三个程序是可靠的调查HCV基因型。特定类型的PCR可提供有关HCV亚型的信息,但是使用这种方法检测到的混合感染应谨慎对待。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

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