Multicenter Comparison of Nucleic Acid Extraction Methods for Detection of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus RNA in Stool Specimens
- 1 August 2006
- journal article
- research article
- Published by American Society for Microbiology in Journal of Clinical Microbiology
- Vol. 44 (8) , 2681-2688
- https://doi.org/10.1128/jcm.02460-05
Abstract
The emergence of a novel coronavirus (CoV) as the cause of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) catalyzed the development of rapid diagnostic tests. Stool samples have been shown to be appropriate for diagnostic testing for SARS CoV, although it has been recognized to be a heterogeneous and difficult sample that contains amplification inhibitors. Limited information on the efficiency of extraction methods for the purification and concentration of SARS CoV RNA from stool samples is available. Our study objectives were to determine the optimal extraction method for SARS CoV RNA detection and to examine the effect of increased specimen volume for the detection of SARS CoV RNA in stool specimens. We conducted a multicenter evaluation of four automated and four manual extraction methods using dilutions of viral lysate in replicate mock stool samples, followed by quantitation of SARS CoV RNA using real-time reverse transcriptase PCR. The sensitivities of the manual methods ranged from 50% to 100%, with the Cortex Biochem Magazorb method, a magnetic bead isolation method, allowing detection of all 12 positive samples. The sensitivities of the automated methods ranged from 75% to 100%. The bioMérieux NucliSens automated extractor and miniMag extraction methods each had a sensitivity of 100%. Examination of the copy numbers detected and the generation of 10-fold dilutions of the extracted material indicated that a number of extraction methods retained inhibitory substances that prevented optimal amplification. Increasing the volume of sample input did improve detection. This information could be useful for the extraction of other RNA viruses from stool samples and demonstrates the need to evaluate extraction methods for different specimen types.Keywords
This publication has 16 references indexed in Scilit:
- Detection and Monitoring of SARS Coronavirus in the Plasma and Peripheral Blood Lymphocytes of Patients with Severe Acute Respiratory SyndromeClinical Chemistry, 2004
- Laboratory Diagnosis of SARSEmerging Infectious Diseases, 2004
- Performance and Cost Evaluation of One Commercial andSix In-House Conventional and Real-Time ReverseTranscription-PCR Assays for Detection of Severe AcuteRespiratory SyndromeCoronavirusJournal of Clinical Microbiology, 2004
- Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS)Journal of Clinical Virology, 2003
- Enteric involvement of severe acute respiratory syndrome-associated coronavirus infection1 1The authors thank Man-yee Yung, Sara Fung, Dr. Bonnie Kwan, and Dr. Thomas Li for their help in retrieving patient information.Gastroenterology, 2003
- Early diagnosis of SARS Coronavirus infection by real time RT-PCRJournal of Clinical Virology, 2003
- Comparison of an Industry-Derived LCx Chlamydia pneumoniae PCR Research Kit to In-House Assays Performed in Five LaboratoriesJournal of Clinical Microbiology, 2002
- Replicate PCR Testing and Probit Analysis for Detection and Quantitation of Chlamydia pneumoniae in Clinical SpecimensJournal of Clinical Microbiology, 2001
- The magnetic immuno polymerase chain reaction assay for direct detection of salmonellae in fecal samplesJournal of Clinical Microbiology, 1992
- Removal of inhibitory substances from human fecal specimens for detection of group A rotaviruses by reverse transcriptase and polymerase chain reactionsJournal of Clinical Microbiology, 1990