应用qPCR技术对支气管肺泡灌洗液中肺囊虫真菌负荷的多中心前瞻性评价。

IF 2.7 3区 医学 Q3 INFECTIOUS DISEASES
Théo Ghelfenstein-Ferreira, Lize Cuypers, Anaïs Pinto, Guillaume Desoubeaux, Vicente Friaza, Stefan Fuchs, Catriona Halliday, Solène Le Gal, Ulrike Scharmann, Joerg Steinmann, Anne Totet, Sean Zhang, Mario Cruciani, Rosemary Barnes, J Peter Donnelly, Juergen Loeffler, P Lewis White, Alexandre Alanio
{"title":"应用qPCR技术对支气管肺泡灌洗液中肺囊虫真菌负荷的多中心前瞻性评价。","authors":"Théo Ghelfenstein-Ferreira, Lize Cuypers, Anaïs Pinto, Guillaume Desoubeaux, Vicente Friaza, Stefan Fuchs, Catriona Halliday, Solène Le Gal, Ulrike Scharmann, Joerg Steinmann, Anne Totet, Sean Zhang, Mario Cruciani, Rosemary Barnes, J Peter Donnelly, Juergen Loeffler, P Lewis White, Alexandre Alanio","doi":"10.1093/mmy/myaf023","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Bronchoalveolar lavage fluid (BALF) is the key sample type for diagnosing Pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia, with quantitative PCR (qPCR) providing high sensitivity and specificity. However, sample processing varies considerably between laboratories, and optimal nucleic acid extraction method for BALF remains undetermined. This retrospective multicenter study, conducted in 12 centers as part of the fungal PCR initiative, assessed the efficacy of P. jirovecii detection by qPCR in different BALF fractions, including whole (WHO), pellet (PEL), and supernatant (SUP). Samples that were P. jirovecii-qPCR-positive during routine testing were divided into the three predefined fractions prior to nucleic acid extraction and qPCR, comparing detection rates and quantification cycle (Cq) values. Out of 113 P. jirovecii-qPCR-positive BALF samples, 339 qPCR measurements were analyzed. The PEL fraction demonstrated a similar detection rate to the WHO fraction, with positivity rates of 92.9% and 88.5%, respectively. The SUP fraction showed a lower positivity rate of 71.7%, dropping to 47% for high Cq values (Cq > 35). Quantitative analysis showed that the SUP fraction consistently yielded higher Cq values, trailing by 3.05 cycles compared to WHO, while PEL showed a smaller deviation (0.49 cycles), confirming its efficiency in retaining P. jirovecii genetic material for qPCR detection. The study concludes that the SUP fraction is suboptimal for P. jirovecii detection due to higher Cq values, suggesting lower fungal loads. The PEL and WHO fractions are comparable, suggesting that the PEL is a viable alternative, permitting the concentration of larger BALF volumes to levels that can be extracted across a range of platforms.</p>","PeriodicalId":18586,"journal":{"name":"Medical mycology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Multicentric prospective evaluation of Pneumocystis jirovecii fungal load in bronchoalveolar lavage fluid fractions using qPCR.\",\"authors\":\"Théo Ghelfenstein-Ferreira, Lize Cuypers, Anaïs Pinto, Guillaume Desoubeaux, Vicente Friaza, Stefan Fuchs, Catriona Halliday, Solène Le Gal, Ulrike Scharmann, Joerg Steinmann, Anne Totet, Sean Zhang, Mario Cruciani, Rosemary Barnes, J Peter Donnelly, Juergen Loeffler, P Lewis White, Alexandre Alanio\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/mmy/myaf023\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Bronchoalveolar lavage fluid (BALF) is the key sample type for diagnosing Pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia, with quantitative PCR (qPCR) providing high sensitivity and specificity. However, sample processing varies considerably between laboratories, and optimal nucleic acid extraction method for BALF remains undetermined. This retrospective multicenter study, conducted in 12 centers as part of the fungal PCR initiative, assessed the efficacy of P. jirovecii detection by qPCR in different BALF fractions, including whole (WHO), pellet (PEL), and supernatant (SUP). Samples that were P. jirovecii-qPCR-positive during routine testing were divided into the three predefined fractions prior to nucleic acid extraction and qPCR, comparing detection rates and quantification cycle (Cq) values. Out of 113 P. jirovecii-qPCR-positive BALF samples, 339 qPCR measurements were analyzed. The PEL fraction demonstrated a similar detection rate to the WHO fraction, with positivity rates of 92.9% and 88.5%, respectively. The SUP fraction showed a lower positivity rate of 71.7%, dropping to 47% for high Cq values (Cq > 35). Quantitative analysis showed that the SUP fraction consistently yielded higher Cq values, trailing by 3.05 cycles compared to WHO, while PEL showed a smaller deviation (0.49 cycles), confirming its efficiency in retaining P. jirovecii genetic material for qPCR detection. The study concludes that the SUP fraction is suboptimal for P. jirovecii detection due to higher Cq values, suggesting lower fungal loads. The PEL and WHO fractions are comparable, suggesting that the PEL is a viable alternative, permitting the concentration of larger BALF volumes to levels that can be extracted across a range of platforms.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":18586,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Medical mycology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-02-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Medical mycology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/mmy/myaf023\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"INFECTIOUS DISEASES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical mycology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/mmy/myaf023","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"INFECTIOUS DISEASES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

支气管肺泡灌洗液(BALF)是诊断吉罗氏肺囊虫肺炎的关键样本类型,定量PCR (qPCR)具有较高的敏感性和特异性。然而,不同实验室的样品处理方法差异很大,BALF的最佳核酸提取方法仍未确定。作为真菌PCR倡议的一部分,这项回顾性多中心研究在12个中心进行,评估了用qPCR检测不同BALF部分(包括全(WHO)、颗粒(PEL)和上清(SUP))的P. jroveci的效果。将常规检测中呈猪卟啉卟啉-qPCR阳性的样本,在核酸提取和qPCR前分成预先确定的三个组,比较检出率和定量周期(Cq)值。在113份jroveci -qPCR阳性的BALF样本中,分析了339份qPCR测量值。PEL检出率与WHO检出率相近,检出率分别为92.9%和88.5%。SUP部分的阳性率较低,为71.7%,在高Cq值(Cq bbb35)时降至47%。定量分析表明,与WHO相比,SUP组分的Cq值始终较高,滞后3.05个循环,而PEL的Cq值偏差较小(0.49个循环),证实了其为qPCR检测保留p.j roveci遗传物质的有效性。该研究认为,由于较高的Cq值,SUP分数对p.j rovecii的检测是次优的,这表明真菌负荷较低。PEL和WHO分数具有可比性,这表明颗粒是一种可行的替代方案,允许在一系列平台上提取更大体积的BALF浓度。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Multicentric prospective evaluation of Pneumocystis jirovecii fungal load in bronchoalveolar lavage fluid fractions using qPCR.

Bronchoalveolar lavage fluid (BALF) is the key sample type for diagnosing Pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia, with quantitative PCR (qPCR) providing high sensitivity and specificity. However, sample processing varies considerably between laboratories, and optimal nucleic acid extraction method for BALF remains undetermined. This retrospective multicenter study, conducted in 12 centers as part of the fungal PCR initiative, assessed the efficacy of P. jirovecii detection by qPCR in different BALF fractions, including whole (WHO), pellet (PEL), and supernatant (SUP). Samples that were P. jirovecii-qPCR-positive during routine testing were divided into the three predefined fractions prior to nucleic acid extraction and qPCR, comparing detection rates and quantification cycle (Cq) values. Out of 113 P. jirovecii-qPCR-positive BALF samples, 339 qPCR measurements were analyzed. The PEL fraction demonstrated a similar detection rate to the WHO fraction, with positivity rates of 92.9% and 88.5%, respectively. The SUP fraction showed a lower positivity rate of 71.7%, dropping to 47% for high Cq values (Cq > 35). Quantitative analysis showed that the SUP fraction consistently yielded higher Cq values, trailing by 3.05 cycles compared to WHO, while PEL showed a smaller deviation (0.49 cycles), confirming its efficiency in retaining P. jirovecii genetic material for qPCR detection. The study concludes that the SUP fraction is suboptimal for P. jirovecii detection due to higher Cq values, suggesting lower fungal loads. The PEL and WHO fractions are comparable, suggesting that the PEL is a viable alternative, permitting the concentration of larger BALF volumes to levels that can be extracted across a range of platforms.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Medical mycology
Medical mycology 医学-兽医学
CiteScore
5.70
自引率
3.40%
发文量
632
审稿时长
12 months
期刊介绍: Medical Mycology is a peer-reviewed international journal that focuses on original and innovative basic and applied studies, as well as learned reviews on all aspects of medical, veterinary and environmental mycology as related to disease. The objective is to present the highest quality scientific reports from throughout the world on divergent topics. These topics include the phylogeny of fungal pathogens, epidemiology and public health mycology themes, new approaches in the diagnosis and treatment of mycoses including clinical trials and guidelines, pharmacology and antifungal susceptibilities, changes in taxonomy, description of new or unusual fungi associated with human or animal disease, immunology of fungal infections, vaccinology for prevention of fungal infections, pathogenesis and virulence, and the molecular biology of pathogenic fungi in vitro and in vivo, including genomics, transcriptomics, metabolomics, and proteomics. Case reports are no longer accepted. In addition, studies of natural products showing inhibitory activity against pathogenic fungi are not accepted without chemical characterization and identification of the compounds responsible for the inhibitory activity.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信