4.4 Article

Frequent coinfection with hepatitis B virus strains of distinct genotypes detected by hybridization with type-specific probes immobilized on a solid-phase support

Journal

JOURNAL OF VIROLOGICAL METHODS
Volume 110, Issue 1, Pages 29-35

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/S0166-0934(03)00095-8

Keywords

hepatitis B virus; genotypes; hybridization; polymerase chain reaction

Ask authors/readers for more resources

A genotype-specific probes assay (GSPA) was developed for distinguishing the seven genotypes (A-G) of hepatitis B virus (HBV). Nucleotide (nt) sequences corresponding to preS1 region were amplified by PCR with a primer labeled with biotin, and delivered to eight wells on which complementary sequences specific to one or other genotype had been immobilized. Thereafter, hybridization of HBV DNA sequences amplified from the test serum was detected by colorimetry. When 256 sera from HBV carriers in Bangladesh, Cameroon, Japan, South Africa, USA and Uzbekistan were subjected to GSPA, genotypes were concordant with those of ELISA with monoclonal antibodies to epitopes on preS2-region products in 242 (94.6%) of them; 8 sera (3.1%) were not genotypeable by either method. Cloning analysis confirmed the presence of two distinct HBV genotypes in the seven selected sera with coinfection. There were 7 (2.7%) sera with discordant genotyping results between GSPA and ELISA. When HBV DNA clones propagated from these sera were sequenced and analyzed phylogenetically, the genotypes determined by GSPA were verified. Cointection with HBV strains of two distinct genotypes was identified by GSPA in 28 (10.9%) sera, while it was suggested by ELISA in only 2 (0.8%) sera. The GSPA method would be particularly useful for detecting the coinfection with distinct HBV genotypes of any clinical relevance, which seems to be more frequent than reported previously. (C) 2003 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available