scholarly journals Evaluation of Three Automated Nucleic Acid Extraction Systems for Identification of Respiratory Viruses in Clinical Specimens by Multiplex Real-Time PCR

2014 ◽  
Vol 2014 ◽  
pp. 1-8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yoonjung Kim ◽  
Mi-Soon Han ◽  
Juwon Kim ◽  
Aerin Kwon ◽  
Kyung-A Lee
Keyword(s):  
Nucleic Acid ◽  
Nucleic Acids ◽  
False Negative ◽  
Virus Detection ◽  
Turnaround Time ◽  
Nasopharyngeal Swab ◽  
Acid Extraction ◽  
Analytical Sensitivity ◽  
Nucleic Acid Extraction ◽  
Negative Results

A total of 84 nasopharyngeal swab specimens were collected from 84 patients. Viral nucleic acid was extracted by three automated extraction systems: QIAcube (Qiagen, Germany), EZ1 Advanced XL (Qiagen), and MICROLAB Nimbus IVD (Hamilton, USA). Fourteen RNA viruses and two DNA viruses were detected using the Anyplex II RV16 Detection kit (Seegene, Republic of Korea). The EZ1 Advanced XL system demonstrated the best analytical sensitivity for all the three viral strains. The nucleic acids extracted by EZ1 Advanced XL showed higher positive rates for virus detection than the others. Meanwhile, the MICROLAB Nimbus IVD system was comprised of fully automated steps from nucleic extraction to PCR setup function that could reduce human errors. For the nucleic acids recovered from nasopharyngeal swab specimens, the QIAcube system showed the fewest false negative results and the best concordance rate, and it may be more suitable for detecting various viruses including RNA and DNA virus strains. Each system showed different sensitivity and specificity for detection of certain viral pathogens and demonstrated different characteristics such as turnaround time and sample capacity. Therefore, these factors should be considered when new nucleic acid extraction systems are introduced to the laboratory.

scholarly journals Evaluation of an Automated High-Throughput Liquid-Based RNA Extraction Platform on Pooled Nasopharyngeal or Saliva Specimens for SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR

Viruses ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (4) ◽  
pp. 615
Author(s):  
Allen Wing-Ho Chu ◽  
Cyril Chik-Yan Yip ◽  
Wan-Mui Chan ◽  
Anthony Chin-Ki Ng ◽  
Dream Lok-Sze Chan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Nucleic Acid ◽  
High Throughput ◽  
Rna Extraction ◽  
Nasopharyngeal Swab ◽  
Acid Extraction ◽  
Rt Pcr ◽  
Nucleic Acid Extraction ◽  
Suitable Alternative ◽  
Pcr Inhibitors ◽  
Pcr Targeting

SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR with pooled specimens has been implemented during the COVID-19 pandemic as a cost- and manpower-saving strategy for large-scale testing. However, there is a paucity of data on the efficiency of different nucleic acid extraction platforms on pooled specimens. This study compared a novel automated high-throughput liquid-based RNA extraction (LRE) platform (PHASIFYTM) with a widely used magnetic bead-based total nucleic acid extraction (MBTE) platform (NucliSENS® easyMAG®). A total of 60 pools of nasopharyngeal swab and 60 pools of posterior oropharyngeal saliva specimens, each consisting of 1 SARS-CoV-2 positive and 9 SARS-CoV-2 negative specimens, were included for the comparison. Real-time RT-PCR targeting the SARS-CoV-2 RdRp/Hel gene was performed, and GAPDH RT-PCR was used to detect RT-PCR inhibitors. No significant differences were observed in the Ct values and overall RT-PCR positive rates between LRE and MBTE platforms (92.5% (111/120] vs 90% (108/120]), but there was a slightly higher positive rate for LRE (88.3% (53/60]) than MBTE (81.7% (49/60]) among pooled saliva. The automated LRE method is comparable to a standard MBTE method for the detection of SAR-CoV-2 in pooled specimens, providing a suitable alternative automated extraction platform. Furthermore, LRE may be better suited for pooled saliva specimens due to more efficient removal of RT-PCR inhibitors.

scholarly journals Limited-Resource Preparable Chitosan Magnetic Particles for Extracting Amplification-Ready Zeptomole-Range Nucleic Acid from Complex Biofluid

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sayantan Tripathy ◽  
Arunansu Talukdar ◽  
Goutam Pramanik ◽  
P. V. Rajesh ◽  
Souradyuti Ghosh
Keyword(s):  
Nucleic Acid ◽  
Real Time ◽  
Real Time Pcr ◽  
Magnetic Particles ◽  
Limited Resource ◽  
Nucleic Acid Amplification ◽  
Acid Extraction ◽  
Analytical Sensitivity ◽  
Nucleic Acid Extraction ◽  
Spin Column

<b>Layman Summary: </b>Nucleic acid extraction is a key prerequisite for any nucleic acid amplification test (NAAT) or isothermal NAAT (iNAAT) based molecular diagnosis assays.<b> </b>Existing methods utilizes spin column system for nucleic acid extraction which are unsuitable for limited resource settings. Our work explores two methods for chitosan coated magnetic particle preparation that can be executed within 6 h from commonly available chemicals with nothing but a magnetic stirrer and water bath and doable by a minimally trained person. We will also investigated the compatibility of the extracted nucleic acid with downstream NAATs such as real time LAMP, colorimetric LAMP, and real time PCR. In the process, we established the analytical sensitivity of the overall method.<div><br><div><b>Characterization methods</b>: SEM, XRD, EDX, FT-IR</div><div><br></div><div><b>Bioanalytical methods:</b> Real time LAMP, Colorimetric LAMP, Real time PCR</div></div>

scholarly journals Enhanced analytical sensitivity of a quantitative PCR for CMV using a modified nucleic-acid extraction procedure

2000 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 32-37 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrea Ferreira-Gonzalez ◽  
Saul Yanovich ◽  
Michael R. Langley ◽  
Lisa A. Weymouth ◽  
David S. Wilkinson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Nucleic Acid ◽  
Quantitative Pcr ◽  
Extraction Procedure ◽  
Acid Extraction ◽  
Analytical Sensitivity ◽  
Nucleic Acid Extraction

scholarly journals Robotic RNA extraction for SARS-CoV-2 surveillance using saliva samples

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jennifer R. Hamilton ◽  
Elizabeth C. Stahl ◽  
Connor A. Tsuchida ◽  
Enrique Lin-Shiao ◽  
C. Kimberly Tsui ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Nucleic Acid ◽  
Rna Extraction ◽  
Detection Sensitivity ◽  
Nasopharyngeal Swab ◽  
Infection Prevalence ◽  
Acid Extraction ◽  
Nucleic Acid Extraction ◽  
Rapid Pcr ◽  
Large Populations ◽  
Asymptomatic Individuals

Saliva is an attractive specimen type for asymptomatic surveillance of COVID-19 in large populations due to its ease of collection and its demonstrated utility for detecting RNA from SARS-CoV-2. Multiple saliva-based viral detection protocols use a direct-to-RT-qPCR approach that eliminates nucleic acid extraction but can reduce viral RNA detection sensitivity. To improve test sensitivity while maintaining speed, we developed a robotic nucleic acid extraction method for detecting SARS-CoV-2 RNA in saliva samples with high throughput. Using this assay, the Free Asymptomatic Saliva Testing (IGI-FAST) research study on the UC Berkeley campus conducted 11,971 tests on supervised self-collected saliva samples and identified rare positive specimens containing SARS-CoV-2 RNA during a time of low infection prevalence. In an attempt to increase testing capacity, we further adapted our robotic extraction assay to process pooled saliva samples. We also benchmarked our assay against the gold standard, nasopharyngeal swab specimens. Finally, we designed and validated a RT-qPCR test suitable for saliva self-collection. These results establish a robotic extraction-based procedure for rapid PCR-based saliva testing that is suitable for samples from both symptomatic and asymptomatic individuals.

scholarly journals Gargle-Direct: Extraction-Free Detection of SARS-CoV-2 using Real-time PCR (RT-qPCR) of Saline Gargle Rinse Samples

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vijay J. Gadkar ◽  
David M. Goldfarb ◽  
Virginia Young ◽  
Nicole Watson ◽  
Linda Hoang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Nucleic Acid ◽  
Standard Method ◽  
Molecular Diagnostic ◽  
Heat Inactivation ◽  
Acid Extraction ◽  
Analytical Sensitivity ◽  
Sample Type ◽  
Mouth Rinse ◽  
Nucleic Acid Extraction ◽  
Single Tube

ABSTRACTBackgroundSaline mouth rinse/gargle samples have recently been shown to be a suitable option for swab-independent self-collection for SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis. We sought to evaluate a simplified process for direct reverse transcriptase PCR (RT-qPCR) testing of this novel sample type and to compare performance with routine RT-qPCR using automated nucleic acid extraction.MethodsClinical saline mouth rinse/gargle samples were subjected to automated nucleic acid extraction (“standard method”), followed by RT-qPCR using three assays including the FDA authorized US-CDC’s N1/N2 assay, which was the reference standard for determining sensitivity/specificity. For extraction-free workflow, an aliquot of each gargle sample underwent viral heat inactivation at 65 °C for 20 minutes followed by RT-qPCR testing, without an intermediate extraction step. An in-house validated RT-qPCR lab developed test (LDT), targeting the SARS-CoV-2’s S/ORF8 genes (SORP triplex assay) and the N1/N2 US-CDC assay was used to evaluate the extraction-free protocol. To improve the analytical sensitivity, we developed a single-tube hemi-nested (STHN) version of the SORP triplex assay.ResultsA total of 38 SARS-CoV-2 positive and 75 negative saline mouth rinse/gargle samples were included in this evaluation. A 100% concordance in detection rate was obtained between the standard method and the extraction-free approach for the SORP assay. An average increase of +2.63 to +5.74 of the cycle threshold (CT) values was observed for both the SORP and N1/N2 assay when extraction-free was compared between the standard method. The average ΔCT [ΔCT=CT(Direct PCR)-CT(Extracted RNA)], for each of the gene targets were: S (ΔCT= +4.24), ORF8 (ΔCT=+2.63), N1 (ΔCT=+2.74) and N2 (ΔCT=+5.74). The ΔCT for the STHN SORP assay was +1.51 and −2.05 for the S and ORF8 targets respectively, when extracted method was compared to the standard method.ConclusionOur Gargle-Direct SARS-CoV-2 method is operationally simple, minimizes pre-analytical sample processing and is potentially implementable by most molecular diagnostic laboratories. The empirical demonstration of single-tube hemi-nested RT-qPCR, to specifically address and alleviate the widely-acknowledged problem of reduced analytical sensitivity of detection of extraction-free templates, should help diagnostic laboratories in choosing Gargle-Direct protocol for high-throughput testing.

scholarly journals Evaluation of real-time nucleic acid sequence-based amplification for detection of Chikungunya virus in clinical samples

2009 ◽  
Vol 58 (9) ◽  
pp. 1168-1172 ◽  
Author(s):  
J.-N. Telles ◽  
K. Le Roux ◽  
P. Grivard ◽  
G. Vernet ◽  
A. Michault
Keyword(s):  
Nucleic Acid ◽  
Real Time ◽  
Chikungunya Virus ◽  
False Negative ◽  
Nucleic Acid Sequence ◽  
Clinical Samples ◽  
Acid Extraction ◽  
Plasma Samples ◽  
Rt Pcr ◽  
Nucleic Acid Extraction

The Chikungunya virus (CHIKV) is a member of the genus Alphavirus that is transmitted to humans by Aedes mosquitoes. In 2005 and 2006, the Indian Ocean island of La Réunion was hit with an unprecedented CHIKV fever outbreak that infected 300 000 people. In the present study, we describe the evaluation of real-time nucleic acid sequence-based amplification (RT-NASBA) for the detection of CHIKV in clinical samples. A co-extracted and co-amplified chimerical CHIKV RNA sequence was used as an internal control to eliminate false-negative results. The detection threshold of the assay was determined from quantified CHIKV-positive plasma, and estimated to be 200 copies per NASBA reaction. The specificity of the assay was determined using blast analyses and non-cross-reactivity using an O'nyong-nyong virus culture and 250 CHIKV RT-PCR-negative plasma samples. A 100 % specificity was found and no invalid result was obtained, showing the good quality of the nucleic acid extraction. The assay was then evaluated using 252 CHIKV-positive RT-PCR plasma samples. The samples were all tested positive, including those with low viral load. This evaluation showed that the RT-NASBA is a rapid (5 h from sample nucleic acid extraction to detection), sensitive, specific and reliable method for the routine diagnosis of CHIKV in clinical samples.

Extraction of viral nucleic acids: Comparison of five automated nucleic acid extraction platforms

2012 ◽  
Vol 54 (3) ◽  
pp. 255-259 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jens Verheyen ◽  
Rolf Kaiser ◽  
Michael Bozic ◽  
Monika Timmen-Wego ◽  
Barbara K. Maier ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Nucleic Acid ◽  
Nucleic Acids ◽  
Acid Extraction ◽  
Nucleic Acid Extraction

Evaluation of automated nucleic acid extraction methods for virus detection in a multicenter comparative trial

2009 ◽  
Vol 155 (1) ◽  
pp. 87-90 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas Bruun Rasmussen ◽  
Åse Uttenthal ◽  
Mikhayil Hakhverdyan ◽  
Sándor Belák ◽  
Philip R. Wakeley ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Nucleic Acid ◽  
Virus Detection ◽  
Comparative Trial ◽  
Extraction Methods ◽  
Acid Extraction ◽  
Nucleic Acid Extraction

scholarly journals Development and application of a canine endogenous internal positive control for use in real-time PCR assays

2018 ◽  
Vol 30 (5) ◽  
pp. 789-792 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joseph J. Modarelli ◽  
Pamela J. Ferro ◽  
Maria D. Esteve-Gasent
Keyword(s):  
Real Time ◽  
Real Time Pcr ◽  
False Negative ◽  
Positive Control ◽  
Acid Extraction ◽  
Nucleic Acid Extraction ◽  
Negative Results ◽  
False Negative Results ◽  
Internal Positive Control ◽  
Pcr Assays

Real-time PCR (rtPCR) tests have become a method of choice in many diagnostic settings, both animal and human. A concern remains, however, regarding rtPCR assay inhibition during nucleic acid extraction and/or rtPCR reaction process that may result in false-negative results. The use of an internal positive control, either endogenous or exogenous, to mitigate this issue has become more commonplace. We identified and standardized an endogenous internal positive control that can be utilized in rtPCR assays targeting canine-specific pathogens in either a singleplex or multiplex format. The target chosen for the endogenous internal positive control (EIPC-K9) was a highly conserved region in canine mitochondrial DNA. Samples from 240 dogs and 11 other species were screened with EIPC-K9; all canine samples were detected, and no cross-amplification with other species tested was observed. Additionally, no inhibition was noted when comparing singleplex to multiplex rtPCR formats.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document