This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowReprints and Permissions
Right arrow Copyright Information
Right arrow Books from ASM Press
Right arrow MicrobeWorld
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Bourlet, T.
Right arrow Articles by Colimon, R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Bourlet, T.
Right arrow Articles by Colimon, R.

 Previous Article  |  Next Article 

Journal of Clinical Microbiology, April 2003, p. 1750-1752, Vol. 41, No. 4
0095-1137/03/$08.00+0     DOI: 10.1128/JCM.41.4.1750-1752.2003
Copyright © 2003, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.

New PCR Test That Recognizes All Human Prototypes of Enterovirus: Application for Clinical Diagnosis

Thomas Bourlet,1 Valerie Caro,2 Sophie Minjolle,3 Isabelle Jusselin,3 Bruno Pozzetto,1 Radu Crainic,2 and Ronald Colimon3*

Laboratoire de Bactériologie-Virologie, GIMAP, Faculté de Médecine, St-Etienne,1 Laboratoire d'Epidémiologie moléculaire des Entérovirus, Institut Pasteur, Paris,2 Laboratoire de Bactériologie-Virologie, Faculté de Médecine, Rennes, France3

Received 6 June 2002/ Returned for modification 25 September 2002/ Accepted 20 December 2002


arrow
ABSTRACT
 
We describe a new PCR test (Penter RT-PCR) that recognizes all 64 prototypes of enterovirus. Sixty clinical samples were analyzed in parallel with this Penter RT-PCR and previously described PCR tests: 34 and 32 samples tested positive, respectively. This assay is suitable for use in clinical diagnosis, and its ability to amplify all known serotypes makes it more useful than other consensus PCR tests.


arrow
TEXT
 
Enteroviruses (EVs) are small single-stranded RNA viruses that comprise 64 serotypes recently redistributed into five species (22). They are responsible for a wide variety of clinical manifestations (eruptions and respiratory, ocular, cardiac, and neurological symptoms [8, 17]). The PCR test first described almost 10 years ago (3, 9, 18) has become the technique of choice for the diagnosis of these infections, particularly for cerebrospinal fluids (7). The rapidity of diagnosis by PCR has proved to be the determining factor in the management of patients, reducing the cost (by preventing unnecessary use of antibiotics) and duration of hospitalization (15, 16). None of the PCR techniques proposed to date, using primers located in the 5' noncoding region, recognizes all 64 prototypes of EVs. The primers described by Zoll et al. do not amplify coxsackieviruses A11, A17, A24 or echovirus 16 (23). Furthermore, it is known that EVs exhibit a high degree of intratypic sequence heterogeneity (13). We describe a new PCR method (Penter RT-PCR) that detects all serotypes of EVs.

The Penter RT-PCR primers (Penter-1 and 2) were selected from within the 5' noncoding region of the EV genome and are 85% identical to known enteroviral RNA sequences. A stair primer PCR system (5, 12) was used. A 420-bp fragment was amplified. This new reverse transcription (RT)-PCR test was performed with all prototypes of EV (obtained from tissue culture or suckling mouse brain), with serotyped field strains, and with frozen clinical samples. These samples were also analyzed by PCR (a technique hereafter referred to as in-house reference RT-PCR) with primers previously described by Zoll et al. (23) or by Rotbart et al. (19) and by means of the protocols described below.

RNA was extracted from prototypes of EV with guanidinium thiocyanate (4, 11). For specimens from patients, RNA was isolated from 140 µl of the sample, by using a viral RNA minikit (Qiagen, Courtaboeuf, France) according to the manufacturer's instructions. RNA from a single extraction was used for both PCR tests, and an aliquot (10 µl) of RNA extract was used as a template for RT. The reaction was performed in a final volume of 20 µl, and we added 10 µl of cDNA to 40 µl of reaction mixture for all PCR tests. RNA extraction and RT, cDNA amplification, and amplicon detection were performed in three separate, nonadjacent rooms.

For the Penter RT-PCR test, the protocol was as follows: RT was performed with 0.5 µM Penter-2, 250 µM concentrations (each) of the four deoxynucleoside triphosphates (dNTPs), 50 U of Moloney murine leukemia virus reverse transcriptase (Stratagene, Ozyme, Montigny-le-Bretonneux, France). The cDNA obtained was then amplified in a volume of 50 µl containing 10 µl of cDNA. The PCR mixture, containing 1 µM concentrations of each primer (Penter-1 and Penter-2), 200 µM concentrations of each of the four dNTPs, and 2 U of Hot Star Taq polymerase (Qiagen) in the appropriate amplification buffer, was incubated in a Hybaid PCR Express thermal cycler (Life Science International, Cergy Pontoise, France) and, after Taq polymerase activation, was subjected to 5 cycles of denaturation at 94°C for 15 s, annealing at 52°C for 60 s, and extension at 72°C for 50 s and 35 cycles at 94°C for 15 s, 54°C for 50 s, and 74°C for 50 s. The amplified product was detected in microtiter plates, with a specific 5'-biotinylated probe, by measuring absorbance. The primers (Penter-1 and Penter-2), amplification buffer, and specific probe were developed in collaboration with Argène Biosoft (Varilhes, France) and are commercially available as a kit, under the name "Enterovirus consensus." Each PCR experiment included negative controls prepared by replacing samples or infected cells with distilled water.

In-house reference PCR was carried out according to two different in-house protocols. At one center (Saint-Etienne Medicine Faculty), the primers 1, 2, and 3 used were those described by Zoll et al. (23). The following modified procedure (2) was applied. The cDNA was produced with 1 µM primer, 3,250 µM concentrations of each of the four dNTPs, and 20 U of Moloney murine leukemia virus reverse transcriptase (Gibco-BRL, Cergy Pontoise, France). After a first round of 30 cycles (94°C for 30 s, 42°C for 60 s, and 72°C for 2 min) in a Thermocis thermocycler (Cisbio International, Gif sur Yvette, France) with primers 1 through 3, 2.5 U of Taq polymerase (GibcoBRL) and 250 µM concentrations of each of the four dNTPs, 2 µl of the PCR product was used for a second round of 20 cycles (94°C for 15 s, 49°C for 60 s, and 72°C for 2 min) with primers 1 and 2. The amplified products were analyzed by electrophoresis in a 1.5% agarose gel containing ethidium bromide, and the fragments, 154 bp in length, were observed under UV light. At another center (Rennes Faculty of Medicine), the primers and probe were those described by Rotbart et al. (19). RT was performed as for Penter RT-PCR, except that we used primer EV2. The PCR mixture, containing 1 µM concentrations of each primer (EV1 and EV2), 200 µM concentrations of each of the four dNTPs, 10 µM digoxigenin-11-dUTP (Roche Diagnostics Systems, Neuilly-sur-Seine, France), and 2 U of Taq polymerase (Promega, Charbonnières, France), was incubated in a Hybaid PCR Express thermal cycler (Life Science International) over 40 cycles (92°C for 15 s, 54°C for 75 s, and 72°C for 75 s). Amplicons were detected in microtiter plates (PCR ELISA DIG detection, Roche) by using a specific 5'-biotinylated probe, EV3.

With the Penter primers, all 64 prototypes gave a positive signal on microtiter plates (Table 1). The three Sabin poliovirus strains and 18 serotyped field strains were also recognized. The sensitivity of the test was determined by using a culture of coxsackievirus B4 and poliovirus strain Sabin 2 and was 0.1 50% tissue culture infective dose. DNA viruses (Epstein-Barr virus, cytomegalovirus, herpes simplex virus type 1) and RNA viruses (respiratory syncytial virus, hepatitis C virus) gave no amplification products. A field rhinovirus strain gave no amplification product, but the rhinovirus 3 serotype was detected. Parechoviruses 1 and 2 (formerly echoviruses 22 and 23) were not detected (20).


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		TABLE 1. Enterovirus serotypes that tested positive by Penter RT-PCR

We tested 60 samples (Table 2). The specimens of the Saint-Etienne Medicine Faculty were taken from patients who had already tested positive by PCR (Amplicor Enterovirus, Hoffmann-Laroche, Basel, Switzerland) or by tissue culture. Specimens from the Rennes Faculty of Medicine were taken from patients for whom investigation for EV had been prescribed. Thirty-four samples tested positive with the Penter primers, and 32 tested positive with the Rotbart or Zoll primers. In four cases, the results of the two types of test were discordant: positive detection was achieved in three cases with the Penter system only and in one case with the Rotbart primers only. All the samples giving discordant results were retested with the Penter system and by in-house reference PCR. A total of 35 samples tested positive with one or the other PCR test. All samples known to be positive from the Saint-Etienne Medicine Faculty retested positive by in-house PCR or Penter PCR.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		TABLE 2. Results of Penter RT-PCR and in-house reference RT-PCR for clinical specimens

Between 1970 and 1983, Strikas et al. (21) identified the 15 serotypes of EV most frequently diagnosed in the United States. The serotypes coxsackievirus A11, A17, A24 and echovirus 16 (coxsackievirus A15 was not tested) not recognized by the primers described by Zoll et al. (23) were not among these serotypes, but neither were dozens of other serotypes. The aforementioned epidemiological study, involving isolation of the virus, showed that the unrecognized serotypes are not those most frequently detected in epidemics to date. However, the recognition of all serotypes, as observed with the test we propose, may nonetheless be advantageous in the face of epidemics due to serotypes of enteroviruses that circulate more rarely. It has been shown, for example, that echovirus 16 (1) may cause epidemics and that coxsackievirus A24 and its variants are a major cause of acute hemorrhagic conjunctivitis (10). These two serotypes are not recognized by the EV primer currently used and described in published studies. Halonen et al. (6) described a consensus PCR test, but they did not test coxsackievirus A18 or echovirus E7. Pozo et al. (14) reported that the Rotbart primers used in the Amplicor Enterovirus test do not always recognize echoviruses 1 and 5. In short, by using the principle of stair primers, the Penter RT-PCR test is able to detect all serotypes of EVs, including both prototype and field strains.

In the highly conserved 5' noncoding region of enteroviruses used to generate the Penter primers, the probe was less specific than expected (recognition of rhinovirus 3). Hyypiä et al. (9) also reported this abnormality. The binding energy of these probes was found to be higher than that deduced from linear sequence analysis. We think that this is due to the particular three-dimensional structures of these regions.

This new consensus RT-PCR test for enteroviruses, which seems as sensitive as techniques previously described for use with clinical samples, should increase the reliability of EV infection diagnosis because it recognizes all known serotypes, without exception. Clinical studies on epidemics and diverse samples should confirm the ability of this new test to diagnose enterovirus infections reliably.


arrow
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
 
We are indebted to Jean Larroque, Martine Joannès, Philippe Bourgeois, and Come Barranger from Argène-Biosoft for their constant support. We are grateful to Danielle Thouvenot and to Jean-Jacques Chomel from Rockefeller University (Lyon I) for providing coxsackievirus strains B1 to B6.

Isabelle Jusselin is funded by Argène-Biosoft.


arrow
FOOTNOTES
 
* Corresponding author. Mailing address: Laboratoire de Bactériologie-Virologie, Faculté de Médecine, Université de Rennes 1, 2 avenue du Pr. Léon Bernard, CS 34317, 35043 Rennes cedex, France. Phone: (33) 2 99 28 42 76. Fax: (33) 2 99 28 41 59. E-mail: ronald.colimon{at}univ-rennes1.fr. Back


arrow
REFERENCES
 
    1
  1. Baron, R. C., M. H. Hatch, K. Kleeman, and J. N. MacCormack. 1982. Aseptic meningitis among members of a high school football team. An outbreak associated with echovirus 16 infection. JAMA 248:1724-1727.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
    2. 2
  2. Bourlet, T., S. Omar, F. Grattard, and B. Pozzetto. 1997. Detection of coxsackievirus B3 in intestinal tissue of orally-infected mice by a standardized RT-PCR assay. Clin. Diagn. Virol. 8:143-150.[CrossRef][Medline]
    3. 3
  3. Chapman, N. M., S. Tracy, C. J. Gauntt, and U. Fortmueller. 1990. Molecular detection and identification of enteroviruses using enzymatic amplification and nucleic acid hybridization. J. Clin. Microbiol. 28:843-850.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
    4. 4
  4. Chomczynski, P., and N. Sacchi. 1987. Single-step method of RNA isolation by acid guanidinium thiocyanate-phenol-chloroform extraction. Anal. Biochem. 162:156-159.[Medline]
    5. 5
  5. Colimon, R., S. Minjolle, P. Andre, C. T. de la Pintiere, A. Ruffault, C. Michelet, and F. Cartier. 1996. New types of primers (stair primers) for PCR amplification of the variable V3 region of the human immunodeficiency virus. J. Virol. Methods 58:7-19.[CrossRef][Medline]
    6. 6
  6. Halonen, P., E. Rocha, J. Hierholzer, B. Holloway, T. Hyypia, P. Hurskainen, and M. Pallansch. 1995. Detection of enteroviruses and rhinoviruses in clinical specimens by PCR and liquid-phase hybridization. J. Clin. Microbiol. 33:648-653.[Abstract]
    7. 7
  7. Henquell, C., M. Chambon, J. L. Bailly, S. Alcaraz, C. De Champs, C. Archimbaud, A. Labbe, F. Charbonne, and H. Peigue-Lafeuille. 2001. Prospective analysis of 61 cases of enteroviral meningitis: interest of systematic genome detection in cerebrospinal fluid irrespective of cytologic examination results. J. Clin. Virol. 21:29-35.[CrossRef][Medline]
    8. 8
  8. Hosoya, M., M. Sato, K. Honzumi, M. Katayose, Y. Kawasaki, H. Sakuma, K. Kato, Y. Shimada, H. Ishiko, and H. Suzuki. 2001. Association of nonpolio enteroviral infection in the central nervous system of children with febrile seizures. Pediatrics 107:E12.
    9. 9
  9. Hyypia, T., P. Auvinen, and M. Maaronen. 1989. Polymerase chain reaction for human picornaviruses. J. Gen. Virol. 70:3261-3268.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
    10. 10
  10. Ishiko, H., N. Takeda, K. Miyamura, N. Kato, M. Tanimura, K. H. Lin, M. Yin-Murphy, J. S. Tam, G. F. Mu, and S. Yamazaki. 1992. Phylogenetic analysis of a coxsackievirus A24 variant: the most recent worldwide pandemic was caused by progenies of a virus prevalent around 1981. Virology 187:748-759.[CrossRef][Medline]
    11. 11
  11. Maniatis, T., E. F. Fritsch, and J. Sambrook. 1989. Molecular cloning: a laboratory manual, 2nd ed. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, Cold Spring Harbor, N.Y.
    12. 12
  12. Minjolle, S., C. Michelet, I. Jusselin, M. Joannes, F. Cartier, and R. Colimon. 1999. Amplification of the six major human herpesviruses from cerebrospinal fluid by a single PCR. J. Clin. Microbiol. 37:950-953.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
    13. 13
  13. Muir, P., U. Kammerer, K. Korn, M. N. Mulders, T. Poyry, B. Weissbrich, R. Kandolf, G. M. Cleator, A. M. van Loon, et al. 1998. Molecular typing of enteroviruses: current status and future requirements. Clin. Microbiol. Rev. 11:202-227.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
    14. 14
  14. Pozo, F., I. Casas, A. Tenorio, G. Trallero, and J. M. Echevarria. 1998. Evaluation of a commercially available reverse transcription-PCR assay for diagnosis of enteroviral infection in archival and prospectively collected cerebrospinal fluid specimens. J. Clin. Microbiol. 36:1741-1745.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
    15. 15
  15. Ramers, C., G. Billman, M. Hartin, S. Ho, and M. H. Sawyer. 2000. Impact of a diagnostic cerebrospinal fluid enterovirus polymerase chain reaction test on patient management. JAMA 283:2680-2685.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
    16. 16
  16. Romero, J. R. 1999. Reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction detection of the enteroviruses. Arch. Pathol. Lab. Med. 123:1161-1169.[Medline]
    17. 17
  17. Rotbart, H. A. 1995. Enteroviral infections of the central nervous system. Clin. Infect. Dis. 20:971-981.[Medline]
    18. 18
  18. Rotbart, H. A. 1990. Enzymatic RNA amplification of the enteroviruses. J. Clin. Microbiol. 28:438-442.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
    19. 19
  19. Rotbart, H. A., M. H. Sawyer, S. Fast, C. Lewinski, N. Murphy, E. F. Keyser, J. Spadoro, S. Y. Kao, and M. Loeffelholz. 1994. Diagnosis of enteroviral meningitis by using PCR with a colorimetric microwell detection assay. J. Clin. Microbiol. 32:2590-2592.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
    20. 20
  20. Stanway, G., and T. Hyypia. 1999. Parechoviruses. J. Virol. 73:5249-5254.[Free Full Text]
    21. 21
  21. Strikas, R. A., L. J. Anderson, and R. A. Parker. 1986. Temporal and geographic patterns of isolates of nonpolio enterovirus in the United States, 1970-1983. J. Infect. Dis. 153:346-351.[Medline]
    22. 22
  22. Van Regenmortel, M. H. G., C. M. Fauquet, D. H. L. Bishop, E. B. Carstens, M. K. Estes, S. M. Lemon, J. Maniloff, M. A. Mayo, D. J. Mc Geoch, C. R. Pringle, and R. B. Wicker. 2000. Virus taxonomy. Seventh report of the International Committee on Taxonomy of Viruses. Academic Press, New York, N.Y.
    23. 23
  23. Zoll, G. J., W. J. Melchers, H. Kopecka, G. Jambroes, H. J. van der Poel, and J. M. Galama. 1992. General primer-mediated polymerase chain reaction for detection of enteroviruses: application for diagnostic routine and persistent infections. J. Clin. Microbiol. 30:160-165.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Journal of Clinical Microbiology, April 2003, p. 1750-1752, Vol. 41, No. 4
0095-1137/03/$08.00+0     DOI: 10.1128/JCM.41.4.1750-1752.2003
Copyright © 2003, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.



This article has been cited by other articles:

  • Jacques, J., Carquin, J., Brodard, V., Moret, H., Lebrun, D., Bouscambert, M., Motte, J., Remy, G., Andreoletti, L. (2003). New Reverse Transcription-PCR Assay for Rapid and Sensitive Detection of Enterovirus Genomes in Cerebrospinal Fluid Specimens of Patients with Aseptic Meningitis. J. Clin. Microbiol. 41: 5726-5728 [Abstract] [Full Text]  

This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowReprints and Permissions
Right arrow Copyright Information
Right arrow Books from ASM Press
Right arrow MicrobeWorld
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Bourlet, T.
Right arrow Articles by Colimon, R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Bourlet, T.
Right arrow Articles by Colimon, R.

Copyright © 2009 by the American Society for Microbiology.   For an alternate route to Journals.ASM.org, visit: http://intl-journals.asm.org | More Info»