Comparison of three genotyping methods to identify Chlamydia trachomatis genotypes in positive men and women

Chlamydia trachomatis (Ct) comprises 3 serogroups and 19 serovars. Different genotyping methods are available to differentiate between the serovars. The aim of this study was to evaluate the sensitivity and discriminatory power of three genotyping methods, respectively Omp1 sequencing, the Ct Detect...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Molecular and cellular probes 2010-10, Vol.24 (5), p.266-270
Hauptverfasser: Quint, K.D., Bom, R.J.M., Bruisten, S.M., van Doorn, L.J., Nassir Hajipour, N., Melchers, W.J.G., de Vries, H.J.C., Morre, S.A., Quint, W.G.V.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 270
container_issue 5
container_start_page 266
container_title Molecular and cellular probes
container_volume 24
creator Quint, K.D.
Bom, R.J.M.
Bruisten, S.M.
van Doorn, L.J.
Nassir Hajipour, N.
Melchers, W.J.G.
de Vries, H.J.C.
Morre, S.A.
Quint, W.G.V.
description Chlamydia trachomatis (Ct) comprises 3 serogroups and 19 serovars. Different genotyping methods are available to differentiate between the serovars. The aim of this study was to evaluate the sensitivity and discriminatory power of three genotyping methods, respectively Omp1 sequencing, the Ct Detection and genoTyping (DT) assay and the pmpH real-time PCR discriminating an LGV infection from a non-LGV infection. In total, 50 Aptima Combo 2 (AC2) Ct positive samples were selected and tested with the 3 genotyping methods. The Ct-DT assay detected 3 double Ct infections that caused a non interpretable result by Omp1 sequencing, while Omp1 sequencing has a higher discriminatory power that gave additional information about Ct genovariants. All three methods detected the 6 LGV samples. Although the pmpH real-time PCR detected all LGV infections, a substantial amount (24%) of non-LGV infections were missed. The sensitivity compared to AC2 Ct detection was 80% (95% CI 67–89%) for the Ct-DT assay, 72% (95% CI 58–83%) for Omp1 sequencing and 64% (95% CI 50–76%) for the pmpH real-time PCR. In conclusion, the Ct-DT assay is appropriate for serovar distribution studies, epidemiological studies and differentiation between an LGV and non-LGV Ct infection, while Omp1 sequencing is more appropriate for phylogenetic studies. The pmpH real-time PCR is suitable as second assay to differentiate between an LGV and non-LGV infection, but not as primary detection assay, due to its low sensitivity for non-LGV strains.
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.mcp.2010.04.007
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_754018550</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0890850810000277</els_id><sourcerecordid>754018550</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c395t-100714f8e9f6e74b62d8cbffd438c64c1931022ca3650968bcf980ff1e28af363</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kEFrGzEQhUVpaBynP6CXoFtP6452tWstPRWTNAVDL81ZyNLIltmVNpLs4n8fGcc99jQz8L3HvEfIFwYLBqz7tl-MelrUUG7gC4DlBzJj0HcVYz3_SGYgeqhEC-KW3KW0B4Ceg_hEbmvg7bLmYkaGVRgnFV0KngZL8y4i0i36kE-T81s6Yt4Fk2gO1Bn02dkTXe0GNZ6MUzRHpXdhVNmlqwgTdZ5OIbnsjlj0nipv6N9QtntyY9WQ8PP7nJOXp8c_q-dq_fvnr9WPdaWbvs0VK0kYtwJ72-GSb7raCL2x1vBG6I5r1jcM6lqrpmtLWrHRthdgLcNaKNt0zZx8vfhOMbweMGU5uqRxGJTHcEhy2XJgom2hkOxC6hhSimjlFN2o4kkykOeO5V6WjuW5Ywlcls-K5uHd_bAZ0fxTXEstwPcLgCXj0WGUSTv0Go2LqLM0wf3H_g20fY5X</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>754018550</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Comparison of three genotyping methods to identify Chlamydia trachomatis genotypes in positive men and women</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals Complete</source><creator>Quint, K.D. ; Bom, R.J.M. ; Bruisten, S.M. ; van Doorn, L.J. ; Nassir Hajipour, N. ; Melchers, W.J.G. ; de Vries, H.J.C. ; Morre, S.A. ; Quint, W.G.V.</creator><creatorcontrib>Quint, K.D. ; Bom, R.J.M. ; Bruisten, S.M. ; van Doorn, L.J. ; Nassir Hajipour, N. ; Melchers, W.J.G. ; de Vries, H.J.C. ; Morre, S.A. ; Quint, W.G.V.</creatorcontrib><description>Chlamydia trachomatis (Ct) comprises 3 serogroups and 19 serovars. Different genotyping methods are available to differentiate between the serovars. The aim of this study was to evaluate the sensitivity and discriminatory power of three genotyping methods, respectively Omp1 sequencing, the Ct Detection and genoTyping (DT) assay and the pmpH real-time PCR discriminating an LGV infection from a non-LGV infection. In total, 50 Aptima Combo 2 (AC2) Ct positive samples were selected and tested with the 3 genotyping methods. The Ct-DT assay detected 3 double Ct infections that caused a non interpretable result by Omp1 sequencing, while Omp1 sequencing has a higher discriminatory power that gave additional information about Ct genovariants. All three methods detected the 6 LGV samples. Although the pmpH real-time PCR detected all LGV infections, a substantial amount (24%) of non-LGV infections were missed. The sensitivity compared to AC2 Ct detection was 80% (95% CI 67–89%) for the Ct-DT assay, 72% (95% CI 58–83%) for Omp1 sequencing and 64% (95% CI 50–76%) for the pmpH real-time PCR. In conclusion, the Ct-DT assay is appropriate for serovar distribution studies, epidemiological studies and differentiation between an LGV and non-LGV Ct infection, while Omp1 sequencing is more appropriate for phylogenetic studies. The pmpH real-time PCR is suitable as second assay to differentiate between an LGV and non-LGV infection, but not as primary detection assay, due to its low sensitivity for non-LGV strains.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0890-8508</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1096-1194</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.mcp.2010.04.007</identifier><identifier>PMID: 20457248</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: Elsevier Ltd</publisher><subject>Bacterial Outer Membrane Proteins - genetics ; Bacterial Proteins - genetics ; Chlamydia trachomatis ; Chlamydia trachomatis - classification ; Chlamydia trachomatis - genetics ; Ct sequencing ; DNA Probes ; DNA, Bacterial - chemistry ; DNA, Bacterial - genetics ; Female ; Genotype ; Genotyping ; Humans ; LGV ; Lymphogranuloma venereum ; Lymphogranuloma Venereum - diagnosis ; Lymphogranuloma Venereum - microbiology ; Male ; Molecular Typing - methods ; Nucleic Acid Hybridization - methods ; Omp1 sequencing ; pmpH ; Polymerase Chain Reaction - methods ; Porins - genetics ; Reproducibility of Results ; Reverse hybridization ; Sensitivity and Specificity ; Sequence Analysis, DNA</subject><ispartof>Molecular and cellular probes, 2010-10, Vol.24 (5), p.266-270</ispartof><rights>2010 Elsevier Ltd</rights><rights>Copyright (c) 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c395t-100714f8e9f6e74b62d8cbffd438c64c1931022ca3650968bcf980ff1e28af363</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c395t-100714f8e9f6e74b62d8cbffd438c64c1931022ca3650968bcf980ff1e28af363</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.mcp.2010.04.007$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,3550,27924,27925,45995</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20457248$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Quint, K.D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bom, R.J.M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bruisten, S.M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>van Doorn, L.J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nassir Hajipour, N.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Melchers, W.J.G.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>de Vries, H.J.C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Morre, S.A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Quint, W.G.V.</creatorcontrib><title>Comparison of three genotyping methods to identify Chlamydia trachomatis genotypes in positive men and women</title><title>Molecular and cellular probes</title><addtitle>Mol Cell Probes</addtitle><description>Chlamydia trachomatis (Ct) comprises 3 serogroups and 19 serovars. Different genotyping methods are available to differentiate between the serovars. The aim of this study was to evaluate the sensitivity and discriminatory power of three genotyping methods, respectively Omp1 sequencing, the Ct Detection and genoTyping (DT) assay and the pmpH real-time PCR discriminating an LGV infection from a non-LGV infection. In total, 50 Aptima Combo 2 (AC2) Ct positive samples were selected and tested with the 3 genotyping methods. The Ct-DT assay detected 3 double Ct infections that caused a non interpretable result by Omp1 sequencing, while Omp1 sequencing has a higher discriminatory power that gave additional information about Ct genovariants. All three methods detected the 6 LGV samples. Although the pmpH real-time PCR detected all LGV infections, a substantial amount (24%) of non-LGV infections were missed. The sensitivity compared to AC2 Ct detection was 80% (95% CI 67–89%) for the Ct-DT assay, 72% (95% CI 58–83%) for Omp1 sequencing and 64% (95% CI 50–76%) for the pmpH real-time PCR. In conclusion, the Ct-DT assay is appropriate for serovar distribution studies, epidemiological studies and differentiation between an LGV and non-LGV Ct infection, while Omp1 sequencing is more appropriate for phylogenetic studies. The pmpH real-time PCR is suitable as second assay to differentiate between an LGV and non-LGV infection, but not as primary detection assay, due to its low sensitivity for non-LGV strains.</description><subject>Bacterial Outer Membrane Proteins - genetics</subject><subject>Bacterial Proteins - genetics</subject><subject>Chlamydia trachomatis</subject><subject>Chlamydia trachomatis - classification</subject><subject>Chlamydia trachomatis - genetics</subject><subject>Ct sequencing</subject><subject>DNA Probes</subject><subject>DNA, Bacterial - chemistry</subject><subject>DNA, Bacterial - genetics</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Genotype</subject><subject>Genotyping</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>LGV</subject><subject>Lymphogranuloma venereum</subject><subject>Lymphogranuloma Venereum - diagnosis</subject><subject>Lymphogranuloma Venereum - microbiology</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Molecular Typing - methods</subject><subject>Nucleic Acid Hybridization - methods</subject><subject>Omp1 sequencing</subject><subject>pmpH</subject><subject>Polymerase Chain Reaction - methods</subject><subject>Porins - genetics</subject><subject>Reproducibility of Results</subject><subject>Reverse hybridization</subject><subject>Sensitivity and Specificity</subject><subject>Sequence Analysis, DNA</subject><issn>0890-8508</issn><issn>1096-1194</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2010</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kEFrGzEQhUVpaBynP6CXoFtP6452tWstPRWTNAVDL81ZyNLIltmVNpLs4n8fGcc99jQz8L3HvEfIFwYLBqz7tl-MelrUUG7gC4DlBzJj0HcVYz3_SGYgeqhEC-KW3KW0B4Ceg_hEbmvg7bLmYkaGVRgnFV0KngZL8y4i0i36kE-T81s6Yt4Fk2gO1Bn02dkTXe0GNZ6MUzRHpXdhVNmlqwgTdZ5OIbnsjlj0nipv6N9QtntyY9WQ8PP7nJOXp8c_q-dq_fvnr9WPdaWbvs0VK0kYtwJ72-GSb7raCL2x1vBG6I5r1jcM6lqrpmtLWrHRthdgLcNaKNt0zZx8vfhOMbweMGU5uqRxGJTHcEhy2XJgom2hkOxC6hhSimjlFN2o4kkykOeO5V6WjuW5Ywlcls-K5uHd_bAZ0fxTXEstwPcLgCXj0WGUSTv0Go2LqLM0wf3H_g20fY5X</recordid><startdate>20101001</startdate><enddate>20101001</enddate><creator>Quint, K.D.</creator><creator>Bom, R.J.M.</creator><creator>Bruisten, S.M.</creator><creator>van Doorn, L.J.</creator><creator>Nassir Hajipour, N.</creator><creator>Melchers, W.J.G.</creator><creator>de Vries, H.J.C.</creator><creator>Morre, S.A.</creator><creator>Quint, W.G.V.</creator><general>Elsevier Ltd</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20101001</creationdate><title>Comparison of three genotyping methods to identify Chlamydia trachomatis genotypes in positive men and women</title><author>Quint, K.D. ; Bom, R.J.M. ; Bruisten, S.M. ; van Doorn, L.J. ; Nassir Hajipour, N. ; Melchers, W.J.G. ; de Vries, H.J.C. ; Morre, S.A. ; Quint, W.G.V.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c395t-100714f8e9f6e74b62d8cbffd438c64c1931022ca3650968bcf980ff1e28af363</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2010</creationdate><topic>Bacterial Outer Membrane Proteins - genetics</topic><topic>Bacterial Proteins - genetics</topic><topic>Chlamydia trachomatis</topic><topic>Chlamydia trachomatis - classification</topic><topic>Chlamydia trachomatis - genetics</topic><topic>Ct sequencing</topic><topic>DNA Probes</topic><topic>DNA, Bacterial - chemistry</topic><topic>DNA, Bacterial - genetics</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Genotype</topic><topic>Genotyping</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>LGV</topic><topic>Lymphogranuloma venereum</topic><topic>Lymphogranuloma Venereum - diagnosis</topic><topic>Lymphogranuloma Venereum - microbiology</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Molecular Typing - methods</topic><topic>Nucleic Acid Hybridization - methods</topic><topic>Omp1 sequencing</topic><topic>pmpH</topic><topic>Polymerase Chain Reaction - methods</topic><topic>Porins - genetics</topic><topic>Reproducibility of Results</topic><topic>Reverse hybridization</topic><topic>Sensitivity and Specificity</topic><topic>Sequence Analysis, DNA</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Quint, K.D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bom, R.J.M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bruisten, S.M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>van Doorn, L.J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nassir Hajipour, N.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Melchers, W.J.G.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>de Vries, H.J.C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Morre, S.A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Quint, W.G.V.</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Molecular and cellular probes</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Quint, K.D.</au><au>Bom, R.J.M.</au><au>Bruisten, S.M.</au><au>van Doorn, L.J.</au><au>Nassir Hajipour, N.</au><au>Melchers, W.J.G.</au><au>de Vries, H.J.C.</au><au>Morre, S.A.</au><au>Quint, W.G.V.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Comparison of three genotyping methods to identify Chlamydia trachomatis genotypes in positive men and women</atitle><jtitle>Molecular and cellular probes</jtitle><addtitle>Mol Cell Probes</addtitle><date>2010-10-01</date><risdate>2010</risdate><volume>24</volume><issue>5</issue><spage>266</spage><epage>270</epage><pages>266-270</pages><issn>0890-8508</issn><eissn>1096-1194</eissn><abstract>Chlamydia trachomatis (Ct) comprises 3 serogroups and 19 serovars. Different genotyping methods are available to differentiate between the serovars. The aim of this study was to evaluate the sensitivity and discriminatory power of three genotyping methods, respectively Omp1 sequencing, the Ct Detection and genoTyping (DT) assay and the pmpH real-time PCR discriminating an LGV infection from a non-LGV infection. In total, 50 Aptima Combo 2 (AC2) Ct positive samples were selected and tested with the 3 genotyping methods. The Ct-DT assay detected 3 double Ct infections that caused a non interpretable result by Omp1 sequencing, while Omp1 sequencing has a higher discriminatory power that gave additional information about Ct genovariants. All three methods detected the 6 LGV samples. Although the pmpH real-time PCR detected all LGV infections, a substantial amount (24%) of non-LGV infections were missed. The sensitivity compared to AC2 Ct detection was 80% (95% CI 67–89%) for the Ct-DT assay, 72% (95% CI 58–83%) for Omp1 sequencing and 64% (95% CI 50–76%) for the pmpH real-time PCR. In conclusion, the Ct-DT assay is appropriate for serovar distribution studies, epidemiological studies and differentiation between an LGV and non-LGV Ct infection, while Omp1 sequencing is more appropriate for phylogenetic studies. The pmpH real-time PCR is suitable as second assay to differentiate between an LGV and non-LGV infection, but not as primary detection assay, due to its low sensitivity for non-LGV strains.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>Elsevier Ltd</pub><pmid>20457248</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.mcp.2010.04.007</doi><tpages>5</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0890-8508
ispartof Molecular and cellular probes, 2010-10, Vol.24 (5), p.266-270
issn 0890-8508
1096-1194
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_754018550
source MEDLINE; Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals Complete
subjects Bacterial Outer Membrane Proteins - genetics
Bacterial Proteins - genetics
Chlamydia trachomatis
Chlamydia trachomatis - classification
Chlamydia trachomatis - genetics
Ct sequencing
DNA Probes
DNA, Bacterial - chemistry
DNA, Bacterial - genetics
Female
Genotype
Genotyping
Humans
LGV
Lymphogranuloma venereum
Lymphogranuloma Venereum - diagnosis
Lymphogranuloma Venereum - microbiology
Male
Molecular Typing - methods
Nucleic Acid Hybridization - methods
Omp1 sequencing
pmpH
Polymerase Chain Reaction - methods
Porins - genetics
Reproducibility of Results
Reverse hybridization
Sensitivity and Specificity
Sequence Analysis, DNA
title Comparison of three genotyping methods to identify Chlamydia trachomatis genotypes in positive men and women
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-24T13%3A06%3A57IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Comparison%20of%20three%20genotyping%20methods%20to%20identify%20Chlamydia%20trachomatis%20genotypes%20in%20positive%20men%20and%20women&rft.jtitle=Molecular%20and%20cellular%20probes&rft.au=Quint,%20K.D.&rft.date=2010-10-01&rft.volume=24&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=266&rft.epage=270&rft.pages=266-270&rft.issn=0890-8508&rft.eissn=1096-1194&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.mcp.2010.04.007&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E754018550%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=754018550&rft_id=info:pmid/20457248&rft_els_id=S0890850810000277&rfr_iscdi=true