Direct identification by PCR of EBV types and variants in clinical samples
✍ Scribed by Falk, Kerstin I.; Zou, Jie-Zhi; Lucht, Erik; Linde, Annika; Ernberg, Ingemar
- Book ID
- 102646920
- Publisher
- John Wiley and Sons
- Year
- 1997
- Tongue
- English
- Weight
- 716 KB
- Volume
- 51
- Category
- Article
- ISSN
- 0146-6615
No coin nor oath required. For personal study only.
✦ Synopsis
Both Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) type A and type B, and variants of type A, were identified simultaneously by polymerase chain reaction (PCR) amplification of a DNA region coding for a 13 amino acid repeat in the Epstein-Barr virus nuclear antigen (EBNA) 6. Whereas this region varies extensively in type A isolates, no variation was seen in type B isolates. When a repetitive region in the LMP1-coding region was amplified by PCR, it was possible to distinguish individual variants of type B isolates from each other. Forty-two saliva samples from HIV-1-carrying individuals were examined for the presence of type A and type B virus. Both types and multiple variants of each type were found with a much higher frequency than in the saliva samples from healthy individuals. Type A EBV alone was detected in mouthwash samples from 6 infectious mononucleosis (IM) patients. Both type A and B were detected in the peripheral blood Blymphocytes (PBL) from 1 healthy individual. The same type A variant was demonstrated both in PBL and in the mouthwash sample from another healthy individual. In this study it was shown that a combination of the EBNA 6-and LMP 1-specific PCRs followed by Southern hybridisation can be used to identify both type A and type B virus, as well as to distinguish between multiple variants of the same strain, in saliva and B-cells from both healthy and immunosuppressed individuals.
📜 SIMILAR VOLUMES
## Abstract The laboratory diagnosis of primary and reactivated Epstein‐Barr virus (EBV) infection is based on serologic methods in immunocompetent patients. However, in immunocompromised patients, serologic data are difficult to interpret and do not often correlate with clinical data. In order to
## Abstract __Pseudomonas aeruginosa__ has emerged as one of the most problematic Gram‐negative nosocomial pathogens. Bacteremia caused by __P. aeruginosa__ is clinically indistinguishable from other Gram‐negative infections although the mortality rate is higher. This microorganism is also inherent