4.6 Article

Early diagnosis of SARS Coronavirus infection by real time RT-PCR

期刊

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL VIROLOGY
卷 28, 期 3, 页码 233-238

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jcv.2003.08.004

关键词

early diagnosis; SARS Coronavirus; real time RT-PCR

类别

资金

  1. PHS HHS [A195357] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: A novel coronavirus was recently identified as the aetiological agent of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS). Molecular assays currently available for detection of SARS-coronavirus (SARS-Cov) have low sensitivity during the early stage of the illness. Objective: To develop and evaluate a sensitive diagnostic test for SARS by optimizing the viral RNA extraction methods and by applying real-time quantitative RT-PCR technology. Study design: 50 nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA) samples collected from days 1-3 of disease onset from SARS patients in whom SARS CoV infections was subsequently serologically confirmed and 30 negative control samples were studied. Samples were tested by: (1) our first generation conventional RT-PCR assay with a routine RNA extraction method (Lancet 361 (2003) 1319), (2) our first generation conventional RT-PCR assay with a modified RNA extraction method, (3) a real-time quantitative RT-PCR assay with a modified RNA extraction method. Results: Of 50 NPA specimens collected during the first 3 days of illness, 11 (22%) were positive in our first generation RT-PCR assay. With a modification in the RNA extraction protocol, 22 (44%) samples were positive in the conventional RT-PCR assay. By combining the modified RNA extraction method and real-time quantitative PCR technology, 40 (80%) of these samples were positive in the real-time RT-PCR assay. No positive signal was observed in the negative controls. Conclusion: By optimizing RNA extraction methods and applying quantitative real time RT-PCR technologies, the sensitivity of tests for early diagnosis of SARS can be greatly enhanced. (C) 2003 Published by Elsevier B.V.

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

4.6
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