Critical analysis of rhinovirus RNA load quantification by real-time reverse transcription-PCR

43Citations
Citations of this article
41Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Rhinoviruses are the most frequent cause of human respiratory infections, and quantitative rhinovirus diagnostic tools are needed for clinical investigations. Although results obtained by real-time reverse-transcription PCR (RT-PCR) assays are frequently converted to viral RNA loads, this presents several limitations regarding accurate virus RNA quantification, particularly given the need to reliably quantify all known rhinovirus genotypes with a single assay. Using an internal extraction control and serial dilutions of an in vitro-transcribed rhinovirus RNA reference standard, we validated a quantitative one-step real-time PCR assay. We then used chimeric rhinovirus genomes with 5′-untranslated regions (5′UTRs) originating from the three rhino-virus species and from one enterovirus to estimate the impact of the 5′UTR diversity. Respiratory specimens from infected patients were then also analyzed. The assay quantification ability ranged from 4.10 to 9.10 log RNA copies/ml, with an estimated error margin of ±10%. This variation was mainly linked to target variability and interassay variability. Taken together, our results indicate that our assay can reliably estimate rhinovirus RNA load, provided that the appropriate error margin is used. In contrast, due to the lack of a universal rhinovirus RNA standard and the variability related to sample collection procedures, accurate absolute rhinovirus RNA quantification in respiratory specimens is currently hardly feasible. Copyright © 2012, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Schibler, M., Yerly, S., Vieille, G., Docquier, M., Turin, L., Kaiser, L., & Tapparel, C. (2012). Critical analysis of rhinovirus RNA load quantification by real-time reverse transcription-PCR. Journal of Clinical Microbiology, 50(9), 2868–2872. https://doi.org/10.1128/JCM.06752-11

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free