4.7 Article

Detection of biological threat agents by real-time PCR: Comparison of assay performance on the RAPID, the LightCycler, and the smart cycler platforms

Journal

CLINICAL CHEMISTRY
Volume 52, Issue 1, Pages 141-145

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1373/clinchem.2005.052522

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Rapid detection of biological threat agents is critical for timely therapeutic administration. Fluorogenic PCR provides a rapid, sensitive, and specific tool for molecular identification of these agents. We compared the performance of assays for 7 biological threat agents on the Idaho Technology, Inc. R.A.P.I.D.(R), the Roche LightCycler (R), and the Cepheid Smart Cycle (R). Methods: Real-time PCR primers and dual-labeled fluorogenic probes were designed to detect Bacillus anthracis, Brucella species, Clostridium botulinum, Coxiella burnetii, Francisella tularensis, Staphylococcus aureus, and Yersinia pestis. DNA amplification assays were optimized by use of Idaho Technology buffers and deoxynucleotide triphosphates supplemented with Invitrogen Platinum (R) Taq DNA polymerase, and were subsequently tested for sensitivity and specificity on the R.A.P.I.D., the LightCycler, and the Smart Cycler. Results: Limit of detection experiments indicated that assay performance was comparable among the platforms tested. Exclusivity and inclusivity testing with a general bacterial nucleic acid cross-reactivity panel containing 60 DNAs and agent-specific panels containing nearest neighbors for the organisms of interest indicated that all assays were specific for their intended targets. Conclusion: With minor supplementation, such as the addition of Smart Cycler Additive Reagent to the Idaho Technology buffers, assays for DNA templates from biological threat agents demonstrated similar performance, sensitivity, and specificity on all 3 platforms. (c) 2006 American Association for Clinical Chemistry.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available