Previous Article | Next Article ![]()
Journal of Clinical Microbiology, March 1999, p. 782-784, Vol. 37, No. 3
Division of Infectious Diseases, Laboratory
of Bacteriology, Hôpital Cantonal Universitaire, CH 1211 Geneva, Switzerland
Received 29 June 1998/Returned for modification 13 October
1998/Accepted 21 November 1998
The use of the COBAS AMPLICOR System (Roche Molecular Diagnostics,
Basel, Switzerland), the only automated system for PCR testing, was
evaluated for a rapid identification of mycobacteria with positive
BACTEC 12B cultures. Two hundred ninety-six specimens with a growth
index of The traditional detection of
mycobacteria is based on microscopic examination of the specimens
stained with Ziehl-Neelsen stain or fluorescent dye and specific
culture techniques. Over the last 10 years, cultures on liquid medium
(BACTEC 12B; Becton Dickinson) coupled with probe hybridization have
contributed to a more rapid detection and identification of
mycobacteria than solid cultures and conventional identification
(11, 15). Recently, molecular amplification methods, such as
PCR, have increased the sensitivity of assays for the direct detection
of Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex in respiratory
specimens (3, 4, 7, 8). Many evaluations of the commercial
PCR test (Amplicor MTB assay; Roche Diagnostic Systems, Rotkreuz,
Switzerland) displayed a high specificity but a variable sensitivity,
which was near 95% for smear-positive specimens but only 60% for
smear-negative specimens (1, 9). An automated system was
developed (COBAS AMPLICOR MTB system; Roche Diagnostic Systems) for the
amplification and detection process. The first published evaluations
from experiments with direct specimens (2, 17) were
disappointing because the sensitivity of the automated system was not
better than that of the manual system. The purpose of the present study
was to evaluate the rapidity and reliability of the automated
commercial COBAS AMPLICOR system on BACTEC 12B broth cultures with a
growth index (GI) of Specimens (n = 2,268) of various origins (respiratory
and nonrespiratory specimens, with the exception of blood cultures) were screened by microscopy for acid-fast bacilli (AFB) and cultured on
BACTEC 12B, Coletsos, and Stonebrink media. From all BACTEC 12B
cultures with a GI of Of the 296 specimens with a GI of
0095-1137/99/$04.00+0
Copyright © 1999, American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.
Assessment of Use of the COBAS AMPLICOR System with
BACTEC 12B Cultures for Rapid Detection of Frequently
Identified Mycobacteria
![]()
ABSTRACT
Top
Abstract
Text
References
30 were analyzed for the presence of Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex, Mycobacterium avium, and
Mycobacterium intracellulare. Compared to traditional
methods and provided that samples with PCR inhibition are retested at a
1:10 dilution, the sensitivity and specificity of the COBAS AMPLICOR
System with BACTEC 12B cultures were 100 and 98%, respectively. The
COBAS AMPLICOR method is rapid and reliable for identifying the most
common mycobacteria in cultures.
![]()
TEXT
Top
Abstract
Text
References
30, for the identification of M. tuberculosis complex, Mycobacterium avium, or
Mycobacterium intracellulare. The results were compared with
the identification by commercial probe hybridization (Accuprobe;
Gen-Probe Inc., San Diego, Calif.) and biochemical identification of mycobacteria.
30 (n = 296), 300 µl of
liquid medium was taken and stored at
20°C. A run with 100 µl of
each stock sample was processed weekly according to the protocol
provided by the manufacturer for the COBAS AMPLICOR test intended for
direct amplification of respiratory specimens (12). The
amplification products were tested with three probes specific for
M. tuberculosis complex, M. avium, and M. intracellulare. An internal control (Myco IC) recently described
by Rosenstraus et al. (13) was performed in all specimens to
monitor the possible inhibition of amplification. The cutoff for a
positive value was an optical density (OD) of 0.350. Inhibited
specimens (Myco IC OD, <0.350) were retested after a 1:10 and 1:100
dilution when the 1:10 dilution remained inhibited. The PCR results
were compared with those obtained with Accuprobe hybridization applied
to BACTEC cultures at GIs of
999 or with the identification from
subcultures on solid media. All specimens with discordant results were
retested with the PCR procedure.
30 in BACTEC 12B cultures, 125 were
culture positive for mycobacteria (42%), 88 (30%) were contaminated
by microorganisms other than mycobacteria, and 83 (28%) were negative
on subcultures (Table 1). The sensitivity of the COBAS AMPLICOR system with BACTEC 12B cultures was 100% and the
specificity was 98%. No positive PCR results with BACTEC cultures
positive for mycobacterial species other than M. tuberculosis complex, M. avium, or M. intracellulare were obtained. No differences between the groups of
respiratory or nonrespiratory specimens for the detection and
identification of mycobacteria were observed. The rate of amplification
inhibition was high (57 of 296 specimens [19%]), without a
predominance of any type of sample. When positive BACTEC cultures were
diluted 1:10, 51 of 57 lost the inhibitors. A 1:100 dilution removed
the inhibition in the six remaining specimens.
TABLE 1.
Comparison of COBAS AMPLICOR PCR and culture results for
the detection of mycobacteria in 296 prospective BACTEC 12B cultures
with a GI of
30
Three samples showed divergent results by PCR and conventional identification methods. Two samples were considered to have false-positive PCR results for M. tuberculosis complex, a joint fluid (BACTEC 12B; GI = 118), and a pleural effusion (GI = 82). For these two specimens, the PCR OD values were 0.641 and 1.233, respectively, for the first assays and 0.467 and 0.018, respectively, for the second assays. The interval between the first and second PCR assay was about 2 months. The two patients presented no clinical evidence of tuberculosis. For the first patient, six other joint fluids were culture negative for the mycobacteria. For the second patient, no other specimen was cultured and the clinical presentation was not compatible with tuberculosis. The third specimen (abdominal ganglion; GI = 999) had a positive PCR result for M. tuberculosis complex, but the cultures were contaminated by bacteria other than mycobacteria. The PCR OD value from the first assay was 0.661, and the value from the second assay was 0.021. This sample most probably contained mycobacteria since AFB were microscopically detected. The patient presented abdominal pain but was not compliant and refused antimycobacterial treatment.
The time required to detect mycobacteria in BACTEC 12B cultures with
the COBAS AMPLICOR system (BACTEC GI,
30) was compared with the
detection by Ziehl-Neelsen staining (BACTEC GI,
100) and Accuprobe
identification (BACTEC GI,
999). The time savings for the
identification of mycobacteria with the COBAS AMPLICOR system were
marginal (0.5 to 1.5 days) compared to that of Ziehl-Neelsen staining
of BACTEC 12B cultures but were almost 1 week compared to that of
Accuprobe hybridization. If the COBAS AMPLICOR system were used only at
a GI of
100 when Ziehl-Neelsen staining was positive for
mycobacteria, the time savings would be 4.5 days for M. tuberculosis complex, 3.5 days for M. avium, and 3 days for M. intracellulare.
Our findings confirm the value of the Roche PCR assay for the rapid detection and identification of mycobacteria in BACTEC 12B broth cultures. The COBAS AMPLICOR system allowed us to identify 118 (93.5%) of the 125 mycobacteria growing in BACTEC 12B cultures and to accelerate the identification of the three most current species of mycobacteria. This approach was tested four years ago with two different manual PCR methods for the detection of M. tuberculosis complex (6) and more recently with the manual Roche Amplicor PCR assay, but only for the detection of M. tuberculosis complex (14). With the development and availability of the commercial automated PCR system, this procedure has attracted further interest. The probes for M. avium and M. intracellulare, tested for the first time in this clinical application, appeared specific in this automatic PCR system. The same observation was previously reported with the same M. avium and M. intracellulare probes for the manual Amplicore MAI (Roche Molecular Systems) evaluated in positive blood cultures of 200 HIV-positive patients (10).
The addition of an internal control was an important improvement because false-negative PCR results due to amplification inhibition in positive specimens were revealed. However, the rate of amplification inhibition (19%) with positive BACTEC 12B cultures was surprisingly high compared to that of the procedure applied directly to respiratory sediments, where 4.7% of specimens were inhibited (2). The origin of these inhibitors remains unknown since about one-half of our inhibited specimens were collected from the respiratory tract. Furthermore, all samples were already diluted in the liquid culture medium, which should have decreased the inhibitors.
In a routine approach, we recommend performing the COBAS AMPLICOR assay
on 1:10 diluted BACTEC 12B cultures with a GI of
100, when AFB are
detectable after Ziehl-Neelsen staining. The advantage of this
procedure is that contaminated or negative BACTEC cultures may be
discarded and amplification inhibitors are reduced. This procedure
would shorten the identification time by 3 or 4 days for M. tuberculosis complex, M. avium, or M. intracellulare with a correct identification in a unique
amplification tube. Similar time savings were reported by Wobeser et
al. (16), who analyzed 141 BACTEC 12B cultures and reported
that PCR results for M. tuberculosis complex were available
4 days before the results of nucleic acid probe hybridization tests.
In conclusion, with the availability of new automated amplification systems, it is essential to evaluate these procedures under different clinical settings. An advantage of the COBAS AMPLICOR system is its capacity to perform multiple assays with a common platform and format (5). This system contributes to the general progress in automation in diagnostic laboratory medicine and to the flexibility in the selection of pathogens to be detected.
| |
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
|---|
The COBAS AMPLICOR system and reagents were kindly provided by Roche Diagnostic Systems, Rotkreuz, Switzerland.
| |
FOOTNOTES |
|---|
* Corresponding author. Mailing address: Division of Infectious Diseases, Laboratory of Bacteriology, Hôpital Cantonal Universitaire, CH 1211 Geneva, Switzerland. Phone: 00 41 22 372 73 09. Fax: 00 41 22 372 73 04. E-mail: Beatrice.Ninet{at}hcuge.ch.
| |
REFERENCES |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| 1. | Bennedsen, J., V. O. Thomsen, G. E. Pfyffer, G. Funke, K. Feldmann, A. Beneke, P. A. Jenkins, M. Hegginbothom, A. Fahr, M. Hengstler, G. Cleator, P. Klapper, and E. G. L. Wilkins. 1996. Utility of PCR in diagnosing pulmonary tuberculosis. J. Clin. Microbiol. 34:1407-1411[Abstract]. |
| 2. | Bodmer, T., A. Gurtner, M. Scholkmann, and L. Matter. 1997. Evaluation of the COBAS AMPLICOR MTB system. J. Clin. Microbiol. 35:1604-1605[Abstract]. |
| 3. | Brisson Noel, A., C. Aznar, C. Chureau, S. Nguyen, C. Pierrre, M. Bartoli, R. Bonete, G. Pialoux, B. Gicquel, and G. Garrigue. 1991. Diagnosis of tuberculosis by DNA amplification in clinical practice evaluation. Lancet 338:364-368[Medline]. |
| 4. |
Clarridge, J. E., III,
R. M. Shawar,
T. M. Shinnick, and B. B. Plikaytis.
1993.
Large-scale use of polymerase chain reaction for detection of Mycobacterium tuberculosis in a routine mycobacteriology laboratory.
J. Clin. Microbiol.
31:2049-2056 |
| 5. |
DiDomenico, N.,
H. Link,
R. Knobel,
T. Caratsch,
W. Weschler,
A. G. Loewy, and M. Rosenstraus.
1996.
COBAS AMPLICORTM: fully automated RNA and DNA amplification and detection system for routine diagnostic PCR.
Clin. Chem.
42:1915-1923 |
| 6. |
Forbes, B. A., and K. E. Hicks.
1994.
Ability of PCR assay to identify Mycobacterium tuberculosis in BACTEC 12B vials.
J. Clin. Microbiol.
32:1725-1728 |
| 7. | Kirschner, P., J. Rosenau, B. Springer, K. Teschner, K. Feldmann, and E. C. Bottger. 1996. Diagnosis of mycobacterial infections by nucleic acid amplification: 18-month prospective study. J. Clin. Microbiol. 34:304-312[Abstract]. |
| 8. | Kox, L. F. F., J. van Leeuwen, S. Knijper, H. M. Jansen, and A. H. J. Kolk. 1995. PCR assay based on DNA coding for 16S rRNA for detection and identification of mycobacteria in clinical samples. J. Clin. Microbiol. 33:3225-3233[Abstract]. |
| 9. | Lebrun, L., D. Mathieu, C. Saulnier, and P. Nordmann. 1997. Limits of commercial molecular tests for diagnosis of pulmonary tuberculosis. Eur. Respir. J. 10:1874-1876[Abstract]. |
| 10. | Ninet, B., R. Auckenthaler, P. Rohner, O. Delaspre, and B. Hirschel. 1997. Detection of Mycobacterium avium-intracellulare in the blood of HIV-infected patients by a commercial polymerase chain reaction kit. Eur. J. Clin. Microbiol. Infect. Dis. 16:549-551[Medline]. |
| 11. |
Riesner, B. S.,
A. M. Gatson, and G. L. Woods.
1994.
Use of Gen-Probe accuprobes to identify Mycobacterium avium complex, Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex, Mycobacterium kansasii, and Mycobacterium gordonae directly from BACTEC TB broth cultures.
J. Clin. Microbiol.
32:2995-2998 |
| 12. | Roche Diagnostic Systems Inc. 1995. COBAS AMPLICOR for MTB. Method Manual. Roche Diagnostic Systems Inc., Branchburg, N.J. |
| 13. |
Rosenstraus, M.,
Z. Wang,
S.-Y. Chang,
D. Debonville, and J. P. Spadoro.
1998.
An internal control for routine diagnostic PCR: design, properties, and effect on clinical performance.
J. Clin. Microbiol.
36:191-196 |
| 14. | Smith, M. B., J. S. Bergmann, and G. L. Woods. 1997. Detection of Mycobacterium tuberculosis in BACTEC 12B broth cultures by the Roche Amplicor PCR assay. J. Clin. Microbiol. 35:900-902[Abstract]. |
| 15. | Telenti, M., J. F. de Quiros, M. Alvarez, M. J. Santos Rionda, and M. C. Mendoza. 1994. The diagnostic usefulness of a DNA probe for Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex (Gen-Probe) in Bactec cultures versus other diagnostic methods. Infection 22:18-23[Medline]. |
| 16. | Wobeser, W. E., M. Krajden, J. Conly, H. Simpson, B. Yim, M. D'Costa, M. Fuksa, C. Hian-Cheong, M. Patterson, A. Phillips, R. Bannatyne, A. Haddad, J. L. Brunton, and S. Krajden. 1996. Evaluation of Roche Amplicor PCR assay for Mycobacterium tuberculosis. J. Clin. Microbiol. 34:134-139[Abstract]. |
| 17. | Yuen, K.-Y., W.-C. Yam, L.-P. Wong, and W.-H. Seto. 1997. Comparison of two automated DNA amplification systems with a manual one-tube nested PCR assay for diagnosis of pulmonary tuberculosis. J. Clin. Microbiol. 35:1385-1389[Abstract]. |
This article has been cited by other articles:
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Copyright © 2009 by the American Society for Microbiology. For an alternate route to Journals.ASM.org, visit: http://intl-journals.asm.org | More Info»