A versatile isothermal amplification assay for the detection of leptospires from various sample types.

Background: Leptospirosis is a zoonotic disease caused by bacteria of the genus Leptospira that affects both humans and animals worldwide. Early detection of the pathogen in humans is crucial for early intervention and control of the progression of the disease to a severe state. It is also vitally important to be able to detect the presence of the pathogen in carrier animals to control the spread of the disease from the environment. Here we developed a simple and rapid loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP) assay targeting the leptospiral secY gene. Results: Several reaction conditions of the LAMP reaction were optimized to ensure efficient amplification of the target DNA. The sensitivity of the developed LAMP assay obtained using a pure Leptospira culture was 2 × 104 copies of genomic DNA per reaction (equivalent to 0.1 ng) for a 40-minute reaction time. No cross-reactions were observed in the LAMP reaction against a series of non-leptospiral bacteria, indicating a specific reaction. The applicability of the LAMP assay was demonstrated on human blood and urine specimens collected from suspected leptospirosis patients and rat kidney specimens collected from suspected leptospirosis outbreak areas and high-risk areas. The developed LAMP assay demonstrated a higher detection rate for leptospiral DNA compared with the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assay, possibly due to the presence of inhibitory substances, especially in rat kidney specimens, to which the PCR method is more susceptible. The present findings also highlight the importance of urine sample collection from patients for routine monitoring of the disease. Conclusions: In short, the developed LAMP assay can serve as a feasible alternative tool for the diagnosis of leptospirosis and be used for epidemiological and environmental surveillance of the disease, considering its robustness, rapidity, sensitivity, and specificity, as demonstrated in this study.

Comparison of Automated and Manual Viral Nucleic Acid Extraction Kits for Covid-19 Detection Using qRT-PCR

@#Introduction: The emergence of a novel Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has resulted in a pandemic. Rapid and accurate diagnosis method is crucial to reduce the disease burden and to improve early diagnosis approaches to control of the disease. Real time Reverse transcriptase PCR (qRT-PCR) has been identified by the World Health Organization as the most sensitive and specific method of detection. However, the success of this assay relies on the quantity and quality of the extracted viral RNA. Methods: Various methods have been developed for nucleic acid extraction however, the methods have not been assessed. RNA extraction was performed from 24 nasopharyngeal swab samples using a manual extraction kit (GF-1) and an automated extraction kit (Genolution). The concentration and purity of the extracted RNA samples were measured, and its performance were tested using qRT-PCR. Results: The average concentration and purity of the RNA samples extracted using GF-1 kit was higher compared to Genolution. Similarly, the qRT-PCR assay using the RNA samples extracted using manual extraction was better compared to automated kit. Conclusion: Both the manual and automated extraction kits have its advantages and disadvantages in terms of yield and purity. However, with proper optimization, both methods may be used for routine molecular diagnostic of COVID-19 in laboratories.

Combined PCR and MAT improves the early diagnosis of the biphasic illness leptospirosis.

The diagnosis of leptospirosis remains a challenge due to its non-specific symptoms and the biphasic nature of the illness. A comprehensive diagnosis that includes both molecular (polymerase chain reaction (PCR)) and serology is vital for early detection of leptospirosis and to avoid misdiagnosis. However, not all samples could be subjected to both tests (serology and molecular) due to budget limitation, infrastructure, and technical expertise at least in resource-limited countries. We evaluated the usefulness of testing the clinically suspected leptospirosis cases with both techniques on all samples collected from the patients on the day of admission. Among the 165 patient's blood/serum samples tested (from three hospitals in Central Malaysia), 43 (26%) showed positivity by microscopic agglutination test (MAT), 63 (38%) by PCR, while 14 (8%) were positive by both MAT and PCR. For PCR, we tested two molecular targets (lipL32 by qPCR and 16S rDNA or rrs by nested PCR) and detected lipL32 in 47 (29%) and rrs gene in 63 (38%) patients. The use of more than one target gene for PCR increased the detection rates. Hence, a highly sensitive multiplex PCR targeting more than one diagnostic marker is recommended for the early detection of Leptospira in suspected patients. When the frequencies for positivity detected either by MAT or PCR combined, leptospirosis was diagnosed in a total of 92 (56%) patients, a higher frequency compared to when samples were only tested by a single method (MAT or PCR). The results from this study suggest the inclusion of both serology and molecular methods for every first sample irrespective of the days post-onset of symptoms (DPO) collected from patients for early diagnosis of leptospirosis.