This Article
Right arrow Full Text
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 Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Emeny, R. T.
Right arrow Articles by Wheeler, C. M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Emeny, R. T.
Right arrow Articles by Wheeler, C. M.

 Previous Article  |  Next Article 

Journal of Clinical Microbiology, November 1999, p. 3627-3633, Vol. 37, No. 11
0095-1137/99/$04.00+0
Copyright © 1999, American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.

Comparison of Variant-Specific Hybridization and Single-Strand Conformational Polymorphism Methods for Detection of Mixed Human Papillomavirus Type 16 Variant Infections

Rebecca T. Emeny,1 John R. Herron,1 Long Fu Xi,2 Laura A. Koutsky,2 Nancy B. Kiviat,2 and Cosette M. Wheeler1,*

Department of Microbiology and Molecular Genetics, The University of New Mexico Health Sciences Center, School of Medicine, Albuquerque, New Mexico 87131,1 and HPV Research Group, The University of Washington, Seattle, Washington 981032

Received 21 May 1999/Returned for modification 21 July 1999/Accepted 11 August 1999

PCR-based variant-specific hybridization (VSH) and single-strand conformational polymorphism (SSCP) analyses were compared for their capacities to detect mixed human papillomavirus type 16 (HPV-16) variant infections within clinical specimens. The SSCP assay used in this comparison targets a 682-bp fragment that spans nucleotides 7445 to 222 within the HPV-16 genome. This fragment includes portions of the HPV-16 long control region and the E6 open reading frame and identifies three categories of SSCP patterns: those identical to the patterns of prototype HPV-16 (P), those identical to the patterns of Caski-derived HPV-16 (C), or those that are different from the P and C HPV-16 patterns and that are therefore classified as belonging to novel (N) HPV-16 variants. VSH targets the entire HPV-16 E6-coding region (nucleotides 56 to 640) and distinguishes previously described variant nucleotides at positions 109, 131, 132, 143, 145, 178, 286, 289, 350, 403, and 532. Clinical samples used in VSH and SSCP analyses were subjected to multiple independent amplification reactions. The resultant amplicons were cloned, and 14 to 78 clones per clinical specimen were evaluated by VSH. VSH detected an HPV-16 variant that represented at least 20% of the amplified HPV-16 variant population. In contrast, SSCP analysis detected HPV-16 variants that represented 36% of the amplified HPV-16 population. Comparison studies were conducted with mixed HPV-16 variant laboratory constructs. Again, VSH had a higher sensitivity than SSCP analysis in detecting mixed HPV-16 variant infections in these constructed amplicon targets. Accurate detection of HPV-16 variants may enhance our understanding of the natural history of HPV-16 infections.


* Corresponding author. Mailing address: Department of Microbiology and Molecular Genetics, The University of New Mexico Health Sciences Center, School of Medicine, 915 Camino de Salud, N.E., Albuquerque, NM 87131. Phone: (505) 272-9151. Fax: (505) 277-5273. E-mail: cwheeler{at}salud.unm.edu.


Journal of Clinical Microbiology, November 1999, p. 3627-3633, Vol. 37, No. 11
0095-1137/99/$04.00+0
Copyright © 1999, American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.