4.4 Article

Comparison of three quantification methods for the TZM-bl pseudovirus assay for screening of anti-HIV-1 agents

期刊

JOURNAL OF VIROLOGICAL METHODS
卷 233, 期 -, 页码 56-61

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.jviromet.2016.03.008

关键词

TZM-bl; HIV-1 pseudovirus; Luciferase; beta-galactosidase

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [81202976]
  2. Beijing Municipal Natural Science Foundation [7142013]
  3. Scientific and Technological Special Project [2014ZX10005002]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The TZM-bl pseudovirus assay is commonly used to evaluate the efficacy of neutralizing antibodies and small molecular inhibitors in HIV-1 research. Here, to determine the optimal measurement method for screening anti-HIV-1 inhibitors, we compared three measurement methods based on firefly luciferase and beta-galactosidase activities. The 50% tissue culture infective doses (TCID50) of the pseudoviruses were determined using the luciferase, beta-galactosidase colorimetric, and 5-bromo-4-chloro-3-indolyl-beta-D-galactopyranoside (X-gal) staining assays. Three commercial reverse-transcriptase inhibitors (azidothymidine, nevirapine, and lamivudine) were tested as reference drugs to compare the reproducibility, linear correlation, and half maximal inhibitory concentration (IC50) values determined using these methods. In the TCID50 assay, the sensitivity of beta-galactosidase colorimetric assay was almost 562 times lower than that of the other two methods. Reproducible dose-response curves were obtained for the inhibitors with all methods; the IC50 values of the inhibitors were not significantly different. Linear regression analysis showed linear correlation between methods. Compared to the beta-galactosidase colorimetric assay, the other two methods have the advantage of high sensitivity and are less affected by interference. In conclusion, the luciferase and X-gal staining assays, which can be applied either alone or combined, are recommended for anti-HIV-1 inhibitor screening. (C) 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据