Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://www.arca.fiocruz.br/handle/icict/10866
Type
ArticleCopyright
Open access
Collections
- IOC - Artigos de Periódicos [12978]
Metadata
Show full item record
SENSITIVE REAL-TIME PCR DETECTION OF PATHOGENIC LEPTOSPIRA SPP. AND A COMPARISON OF NUCLEIC ACID AMPLIFICATION METHODS FOR THE DIAGNOSIS OF LEPTOSPIROSIS
Author
Affilliation
Stanford University School of Medicine. Division of Infectious Diseases and Geographic Medicine. Department of Medicine. Stanford, CA, USA.
Fundação Oswaldo Cruz. Instituto Oswaldo Cruz. WHO/PAHO Centro Colaborador para Leptospirose. Coleção de Leptospira. Centro de Referência Nacional para Leptospirose. Laboratório de Zoonoses Bacterianas. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brasil.
Stanford University School of Medicine. Department of Pathology. Stanford, CA, USA.
Stanford University School of Medicine. Department of Pathology. Stanford, CA, USA.
Stanford University School of Medicine. Department of Pathology. Stanford, CA, USA.
Stanford University School of Medicine. Department of Pathology. Stanford, CA, USA.
Fundação Oswaldo Cruz. Instituto Oswaldo Cruz. WHO/PAHO Centro Colaborador para Leptospirose. Coleção de Leptospira. Centro de Referência Nacional para Leptospirose. Laboratório de Zoonoses Bacterianas. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brasil.
Stanford University School of Medicine. Division of Infectious Diseases and Geographic Medicine. Department of Medicine. Department of Pathology. Stanford, CA, USA.
Fundação Oswaldo Cruz. Instituto Oswaldo Cruz. WHO/PAHO Centro Colaborador para Leptospirose. Coleção de Leptospira. Centro de Referência Nacional para Leptospirose. Laboratório de Zoonoses Bacterianas. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brasil.
Stanford University School of Medicine. Department of Pathology. Stanford, CA, USA.
Stanford University School of Medicine. Department of Pathology. Stanford, CA, USA.
Stanford University School of Medicine. Department of Pathology. Stanford, CA, USA.
Stanford University School of Medicine. Department of Pathology. Stanford, CA, USA.
Fundação Oswaldo Cruz. Instituto Oswaldo Cruz. WHO/PAHO Centro Colaborador para Leptospirose. Coleção de Leptospira. Centro de Referência Nacional para Leptospirose. Laboratório de Zoonoses Bacterianas. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brasil.
Stanford University School of Medicine. Division of Infectious Diseases and Geographic Medicine. Department of Medicine. Department of Pathology. Stanford, CA, USA.
Abstract
Background: Bacteria of the genus Leptospira, the causative agents of leptospirosis, are categorized into pathogenic and
non-pathogenic species. However, the benefit of using a clinical diagnostic that is specific for pathogenic species remains
unclear. In this study, we present the development of a real-time PCR (rtPCR) for the detection of pathogenic Leptospira (the
pathogenic rtPCR), and we perform a comparison of the pathogenic rtPCR with a published assay that detects all Leptospira
species [the undifferentiated febrile illness (UFI) assay] and a reference 16S Leptospira rtPCR, which was originally designed
to detect pathogenic species.
Methodology/Principal Findings: For the pathogenic rtPCR, a new hydrolysis probe was designed for use with primers
from the UFI assay, which targets the 16S gene. The pathogenic rtPCR detected Leptospira DNA in 37/37 cultured isolates
from 5 pathogenic and one intermediate species. Two strains of the non-pathogenic L. biflexa produced no signal. Clinical
samples from 65 patients with suspected leptospirosis were then tested using the pathogenic rtPCR and a reference
Leptospira 16S rtPCR. All 65 samples had tested positive for Leptospira using the UFI assay; 62 (95.4%) samples tested
positive using the pathogenic rtPCR (p = 0.24). Only 24 (36.9%) samples tested positive in the reference 16S rtPCR (p,0.0001
for comparison with the pathogenic rtPCR and UFI assays). Amplicon sequencing confirmed the detection of pathogenic
Leptospira species in 49/50 cases, including 3 cases that were only detected using the UFI assay.
Conclusions/Significance: The pathogenic rtPCR displayed similar sensitivity to the UFI assay when testing clinical
specimens with no difference in specificity. Both assays proved significantly more sensitive than a real-time molecular test
used for comparison. Future studies are needed to investigate the clinical and epidemiologic significance of more sensitive
Leptospira detection using these tests.
Share