自动连接酶链反应系统与一步聚合酶链反应系统诊断结核分枝杆菌复合体的敏感性和特异性比较。

Changgeng yi xue za zhi Pub Date : 1999-06-01
I J Lin, M J Che, A Yeh, J J Hwang, C Y Wei, W L Tsao, C P Lee
{"title":"自动连接酶链反应系统与一步聚合酶链反应系统诊断结核分枝杆菌复合体的敏感性和特异性比较。","authors":"I J Lin,&nbsp;M J Che,&nbsp;A Yeh,&nbsp;J J Hwang,&nbsp;C Y Wei,&nbsp;W L Tsao,&nbsp;C P Lee","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and ligase chain reaction (LCR) are two nucleic acid amplification-based molecular methods. The former has been used widely in the identification of Mycobacterium tuberculosis (M. tuberculosis). In contrast, the LCR assay which was recently introduced is not well known in our medical communities in Taiwan. To determine which method is more reliable and suitable for the identification of M. tuberculosis in our clinics, we compared the sensitivity and specificity of these two methods.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>An automatic LCR assay system and a manual one-step PCR assay were studied in a side by side comparison of their performance in detection of M. tuberculosis. The automatic LCR system uses the single copy antigen protein b (Pab) gene and the manual one-step PCR assay uses the multi-copy IS6110 insertion element as the target DNA; both target DNA sequences are found specifically in M. tuberculosis complex.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Both assays detected two of the M. tuberculosis complex strains, M. tuberculosis and M. bovis, but not other mycobacterial strains. In addition, both methods, which were based on different amplification principles, showed compatible sensitivity; as low as 10 and 100 copies of M. tuberculosis genomes were detected by the LCR and PCR assays, respectively. When the template DNA was less than 1000 copies, however, the automatic LCR assay system showed a lower reproducibility than that of the one-step PCR assay.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our results suggest that in addition to the PCR assay, the LCR assay is a useful method for the molecular identification of M. tuberculosis complex strains.</p>","PeriodicalId":77066,"journal":{"name":"Changgeng yi xue za zhi","volume":"22 2","pages":"204-11"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1999-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of the sensitivity and specificity of an automatic ligase chain reaction assay system with a one-step polymerase chain reaction assay in the diagnosis of Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex.\",\"authors\":\"I J Lin,&nbsp;M J Che,&nbsp;A Yeh,&nbsp;J J Hwang,&nbsp;C Y Wei,&nbsp;W L Tsao,&nbsp;C P Lee\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and ligase chain reaction (LCR) are two nucleic acid amplification-based molecular methods. The former has been used widely in the identification of Mycobacterium tuberculosis (M. tuberculosis). In contrast, the LCR assay which was recently introduced is not well known in our medical communities in Taiwan. To determine which method is more reliable and suitable for the identification of M. tuberculosis in our clinics, we compared the sensitivity and specificity of these two methods.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>An automatic LCR assay system and a manual one-step PCR assay were studied in a side by side comparison of their performance in detection of M. tuberculosis. The automatic LCR system uses the single copy antigen protein b (Pab) gene and the manual one-step PCR assay uses the multi-copy IS6110 insertion element as the target DNA; both target DNA sequences are found specifically in M. tuberculosis complex.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Both assays detected two of the M. tuberculosis complex strains, M. tuberculosis and M. bovis, but not other mycobacterial strains. In addition, both methods, which were based on different amplification principles, showed compatible sensitivity; as low as 10 and 100 copies of M. tuberculosis genomes were detected by the LCR and PCR assays, respectively. When the template DNA was less than 1000 copies, however, the automatic LCR assay system showed a lower reproducibility than that of the one-step PCR assay.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our results suggest that in addition to the PCR assay, the LCR assay is a useful method for the molecular identification of M. tuberculosis complex strains.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":77066,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Changgeng yi xue za zhi\",\"volume\":\"22 2\",\"pages\":\"204-11\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1999-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Changgeng yi xue za zhi\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Changgeng yi xue za zhi","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:聚合酶链反应(PCR)和连接酶链反应(LCR)是两种基于核酸扩增的分子方法。前者已广泛用于结核分枝杆菌的鉴定。相比之下,最近引进的LCR测定法在我们台湾医学界并不为人所熟知。为了确定哪一种方法更可靠,更适合于我们诊所的结核分枝杆菌的鉴定,我们比较了这两种方法的敏感性和特异性。方法:对自动LCR检测系统和手动一步PCR检测系统在结核分枝杆菌检测中的性能进行对比研究。自动LCR系统使用单拷贝抗原蛋白b (Pab)基因,手动一步PCR检测使用多拷贝IS6110插入元件作为靶DNA;这两个目标DNA序列都是在结核分枝杆菌复合体中特异性发现的。结果:两种方法均检出结核分枝杆菌复合菌株结核分枝杆菌和牛分枝杆菌,未检出其他分枝杆菌。两种方法基于不同的扩增原理,但灵敏度一致;LCR和PCR分别检测到低至10个和100个结核分枝杆菌基因组拷贝。然而,当模板DNA小于1000拷贝时,自动LCR检测系统的再现性低于一步PCR检测。结论:LCR法是除PCR法外,对结核分枝杆菌复合体进行分子鉴定的有效方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparison of the sensitivity and specificity of an automatic ligase chain reaction assay system with a one-step polymerase chain reaction assay in the diagnosis of Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex.

Background: Polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and ligase chain reaction (LCR) are two nucleic acid amplification-based molecular methods. The former has been used widely in the identification of Mycobacterium tuberculosis (M. tuberculosis). In contrast, the LCR assay which was recently introduced is not well known in our medical communities in Taiwan. To determine which method is more reliable and suitable for the identification of M. tuberculosis in our clinics, we compared the sensitivity and specificity of these two methods.

Methods: An automatic LCR assay system and a manual one-step PCR assay were studied in a side by side comparison of their performance in detection of M. tuberculosis. The automatic LCR system uses the single copy antigen protein b (Pab) gene and the manual one-step PCR assay uses the multi-copy IS6110 insertion element as the target DNA; both target DNA sequences are found specifically in M. tuberculosis complex.

Results: Both assays detected two of the M. tuberculosis complex strains, M. tuberculosis and M. bovis, but not other mycobacterial strains. In addition, both methods, which were based on different amplification principles, showed compatible sensitivity; as low as 10 and 100 copies of M. tuberculosis genomes were detected by the LCR and PCR assays, respectively. When the template DNA was less than 1000 copies, however, the automatic LCR assay system showed a lower reproducibility than that of the one-step PCR assay.

Conclusion: Our results suggest that in addition to the PCR assay, the LCR assay is a useful method for the molecular identification of M. tuberculosis complex strains.

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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信