| Literature DB >> 25274259 |
Atitaya Hitakarun1, Peerapan Tan-ariya2, Suradej Siripattanapipong3, Mathirut Mungthin4, Phunlerd Piyaraj5, Tawee Naaglor6, Padet Siriyasatien7, Saruda Tiwananthagorn8, Saovanee Leelayoova9.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Leishmania siamensis, a newly identified species, has been reported as a causative agent of leishmaniasis in Thailand. This organism has been identified and genetically characterized using PCR techniques based on several target genes. However, the sensitivities and specificities of these methods for the diagnosis of L. siamensis infection have never been evaluated.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2014 PMID: 25274259 PMCID: PMC4188918 DOI: 10.1186/s13071-014-0458-x
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Parasit Vectors ISSN: 1756-3305 Impact factor: 3.876
PCR methods and primers used in this study
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| L5.8S | TGA TAC CAC TTA TCG CAC TT | 53 | 348 | [ |
| LITSR | CTG GAT CAT TTT CCG ATG | ||||
|
| LH-CPBEF-F2 | TGC GGS TCS TGC TGG GCS TTC | 59 | 525 | This study |
| LH-CPBEF-R | GCG SAY GTA SCC CTT CTC RC | ||||
|
| L.cyt-S | GGT GTA GGT TTT AGT YTA GG | 55 | 900 | [ |
| L.cyt-R | CTA CAA TAA ACA AAT CAT AAT ATR CAA TT | ||||
|
| HSP70senKS | GAC GGT GCC KGC STA CTT CAA | 61 | 1422 | [ |
| HSP70ant | CCG CCC ATG CTC TGG TAC ATC | ||||
|
| Fme | TAT TGG TAT GCG AAA CTT CCG | 54 | 540 | [ |
| Rme | ACA GAA ACT GAT ACT TAT ATA GCG | ||||
|
| S4 | GAT CCA GCT GCA GGT TCA CC | 67 | 540 | [ |
| S12 | GGT TGA TTC CGT CAA CGG AC | ||||
|
| TIM-F | TCA ACG AKC ATC AGA TCG AC | 53 | 500 | This study |
| TIM-R | ATC TTC TCG CTC ACC CAC TG |
The detection limit of seven PCR methods for the detection of
|
|
| |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
| |||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| + | + | + | + | + | - | + | + | + | + | + | - |
|
| + | + | + | - | - | - | + | + | + | - | - | - |
|
| + | + | + | - | - | - | + | + | + | - | - | - |
|
| + | + | + | + | - | - | + | + | + | + | - | - |
|
| + | + | + | + | - | - | + | + | + | + | - | - |
|
| + | + | + | + | + | - | + | + | + | + | + | - |
|
| + | + | + | + | - | - | + | + | + | + | - | - |
*Ten-fold serial dilutions were performed to obtain samples containing 500, 50, 5, 0.5, 0.05 and 0.005 promastigotes/μl before DNA extraction.
Comparison of cross-amplification of seven PCR methods
|
|
| ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| - | - | + | - | - | - | - |
|
| + | + | + | + | + | - | - |
|
| + | - | - | - | - | - | - |
|
| + | - | + | - | - | - | - |
|
| - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
|
| + | - | + | - | - | - | - |
|
| - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
Sensitivities, specificities and positive and negative predictive values of PCR methods to detect compared with the ITS1-PCR methods
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
| ||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
|
| +ve | 8 (100.0) | 16 (47.1) | 100 (63.1-100.0) | 52.9 (35.1-70.2) | 33.3 (15.6-55.3) | 100 (81.5-100.0) |
| -ve | 0 (0) | 18 (52.9) | |||||
|
| +ve | 3 (37.5) | 0 (0) | 37.5 (8.52-75.5) | 100 (89.7-100.0) | 100 (29.2-100.0) | 87.2 (72.6-95.7) |
| -ve | 5 (62.5) | 34 (100.0) | |||||
|
| +ve | 7 (87.5) | 7 (22.8) | 87.5 (47.3-99.7) | 79.4 (62.1-91.3) | 50 (23.0-77.0) | 96.4 (81.7-99.9) |
| -ve | 1 (12.5) | 27 (77.2) | |||||
|
| +ve | 7 (87.5) | 0 (0) | 87.5 (47.3-99.7) | 100 (89.7-100.0) | 100 (59.0-100.0) | 97.1 (85.1-99.9) |
| -ve | 1 (12.5) | 34 (100.0) | |||||
|
| +ve | 8 (100.0) | 6 (17.6) | 100 (63.1-100.0) | 82.4 (65.5-93.2) | 57.1 (28.9-82.3) | 100 (87.7-100.0) |
| -ve | 0 (0) | 28 (82.4) | |||||
|
| +ve | 4 (50) | 0 (0) | 50 (15.7-84.3) | 100 (90.7-100.0) | 100 (39.8-100.0) | 90.5 (77.4-97.3) |
| -ve | 4 (50) | 38 (100.0) | |||||
+ve, positive, −ve, negative.