The use of microbead-based spoligotyping for <it>Mycobacterium tuberculosis </it>complex to evaluate the quality of the conventional method: Providing guidelines for Quality Assurance when working on membranes
<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The classical spoligotyping technique, relying on membrane reverse line-blot hybridization of the spacers of the <it>Mycobacterium tuberculosis </it>CRISPR locus, is used world-wide (598 references in Pubmed on April 8th,...
Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
BMC
2011-04-01
|
Series: | BMC Infectious Diseases |
Online Access: | http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2334/11/110 |
id |
doaj-2259e0564f4741df8127e98c90153122 |
---|---|
record_format |
Article |
spelling |
doaj-2259e0564f4741df8127e98c901531222020-11-25T01:21:41ZengBMCBMC Infectious Diseases1471-23342011-04-0111111010.1186/1471-2334-11-110The use of microbead-based spoligotyping for <it>Mycobacterium tuberculosis </it>complex to evaluate the quality of the conventional method: Providing guidelines for Quality Assurance when working on membranesGarzelli CarloRastogi NalinAl-Hajoj SahalHerranz Martade Viedma DaríoRasolofo-Razanamparany VoahangyStoffels KarolienFauville-Dufaux MaryseElias AtináGomes HarrisonRigouts LeenRuimy RaymondKremer KristinRitacco VivianaZhang JianAbadia EdgarTortoli EnricoSuffys Philip Nvan Soolingen DickRefrégier GuislaineSola Christophe<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The classical spoligotyping technique, relying on membrane reverse line-blot hybridization of the spacers of the <it>Mycobacterium tuberculosis </it>CRISPR locus, is used world-wide (598 references in Pubmed on April 8th, 2011). However, until now no inter-laboratory quality control study had been undertaken to validate this technique. We analyzed the quality of membrane-based spoligotyping by comparing it to the recently introduced and highly robust microbead-based spoligotyping. Nine hundred and twenty-seven isolates were analyzed totaling 39,861 data points. Samples were received from 11 international laboratories with a worldwide distribution.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>The high-throughput microbead-based Spoligotyping was performed on CTAB and thermolyzate DNA extracted from isolated <it>Mycobacterium tuberculosis </it>complex (MTC) strains coming from the genotyping participating centers. Information regarding how the classical Spoligotyping method was performed by center was available. Genotype discriminatory analyses were carried out by comparing the spoligotypes obtained by both methods. The non parametric U-Mann Whitney homogeneity test and the Spearman rank correlation test were performed to validate the observed results.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Seven out of the 11 laboratories (63 %), perfectly typed more than 90% of isolates, 3 scored between 80-90% and a single center was under 80% reaching 51% concordance only. However, this was mainly due to discordance in a single spacer, likely having a non-functional probe on the membrane used. The centers using thermolyzate DNA performed as well as centers using the more extended CTAB extraction procedure. Few centers shared the same problematic spacers and these problematic spacers were scattered over the whole CRISPR locus (Mostly spacers 15, 14, 18, 37, 39, 40).</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>We confirm that classical spoligotyping is a robust method with generally a high reliability in most centers. The applied DNA extraction procedure (CTAB or thermolyzate) did not affect the results in this study. However performance was center-dependent, suggesting that training is a key component in quality assurance of spoligotyping. Overall, no particular spacer yielded a higher degree of deviating results, suggesting that errors occur randomly either in the process of re-using membranes, or during the reading of the results and transferring of data from the film to a digital file. Last, the performance of the microbead-based method was excellent as previously shown by Cowan <it>et al</it>. (J. Clin. Microbiol. 2004) and Zhang <it>et al</it>. (J. Med. Microbiol. 2009) and demonstrated the proper detection of spacer 15 that is known to occasionally give weak signals in the classical spoligotyping.</p> http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2334/11/110 |
collection |
DOAJ |
language |
English |
format |
Article |
sources |
DOAJ |
author |
Garzelli Carlo Rastogi Nalin Al-Hajoj Sahal Herranz Marta de Viedma Darío Rasolofo-Razanamparany Voahangy Stoffels Karolien Fauville-Dufaux Maryse Elias Atiná Gomes Harrison Rigouts Leen Ruimy Raymond Kremer Kristin Ritacco Viviana Zhang Jian Abadia Edgar Tortoli Enrico Suffys Philip N van Soolingen Dick Refrégier Guislaine Sola Christophe |
spellingShingle |
Garzelli Carlo Rastogi Nalin Al-Hajoj Sahal Herranz Marta de Viedma Darío Rasolofo-Razanamparany Voahangy Stoffels Karolien Fauville-Dufaux Maryse Elias Atiná Gomes Harrison Rigouts Leen Ruimy Raymond Kremer Kristin Ritacco Viviana Zhang Jian Abadia Edgar Tortoli Enrico Suffys Philip N van Soolingen Dick Refrégier Guislaine Sola Christophe The use of microbead-based spoligotyping for <it>Mycobacterium tuberculosis </it>complex to evaluate the quality of the conventional method: Providing guidelines for Quality Assurance when working on membranes BMC Infectious Diseases |
author_facet |
Garzelli Carlo Rastogi Nalin Al-Hajoj Sahal Herranz Marta de Viedma Darío Rasolofo-Razanamparany Voahangy Stoffels Karolien Fauville-Dufaux Maryse Elias Atiná Gomes Harrison Rigouts Leen Ruimy Raymond Kremer Kristin Ritacco Viviana Zhang Jian Abadia Edgar Tortoli Enrico Suffys Philip N van Soolingen Dick Refrégier Guislaine Sola Christophe |
author_sort |
Garzelli Carlo |
title |
The use of microbead-based spoligotyping for <it>Mycobacterium tuberculosis </it>complex to evaluate the quality of the conventional method: Providing guidelines for Quality Assurance when working on membranes |
title_short |
The use of microbead-based spoligotyping for <it>Mycobacterium tuberculosis </it>complex to evaluate the quality of the conventional method: Providing guidelines for Quality Assurance when working on membranes |
title_full |
The use of microbead-based spoligotyping for <it>Mycobacterium tuberculosis </it>complex to evaluate the quality of the conventional method: Providing guidelines for Quality Assurance when working on membranes |
title_fullStr |
The use of microbead-based spoligotyping for <it>Mycobacterium tuberculosis </it>complex to evaluate the quality of the conventional method: Providing guidelines for Quality Assurance when working on membranes |
title_full_unstemmed |
The use of microbead-based spoligotyping for <it>Mycobacterium tuberculosis </it>complex to evaluate the quality of the conventional method: Providing guidelines for Quality Assurance when working on membranes |
title_sort |
use of microbead-based spoligotyping for <it>mycobacterium tuberculosis </it>complex to evaluate the quality of the conventional method: providing guidelines for quality assurance when working on membranes |
publisher |
BMC |
series |
BMC Infectious Diseases |
issn |
1471-2334 |
publishDate |
2011-04-01 |
description |
<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The classical spoligotyping technique, relying on membrane reverse line-blot hybridization of the spacers of the <it>Mycobacterium tuberculosis </it>CRISPR locus, is used world-wide (598 references in Pubmed on April 8th, 2011). However, until now no inter-laboratory quality control study had been undertaken to validate this technique. We analyzed the quality of membrane-based spoligotyping by comparing it to the recently introduced and highly robust microbead-based spoligotyping. Nine hundred and twenty-seven isolates were analyzed totaling 39,861 data points. Samples were received from 11 international laboratories with a worldwide distribution.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>The high-throughput microbead-based Spoligotyping was performed on CTAB and thermolyzate DNA extracted from isolated <it>Mycobacterium tuberculosis </it>complex (MTC) strains coming from the genotyping participating centers. Information regarding how the classical Spoligotyping method was performed by center was available. Genotype discriminatory analyses were carried out by comparing the spoligotypes obtained by both methods. The non parametric U-Mann Whitney homogeneity test and the Spearman rank correlation test were performed to validate the observed results.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Seven out of the 11 laboratories (63 %), perfectly typed more than 90% of isolates, 3 scored between 80-90% and a single center was under 80% reaching 51% concordance only. However, this was mainly due to discordance in a single spacer, likely having a non-functional probe on the membrane used. The centers using thermolyzate DNA performed as well as centers using the more extended CTAB extraction procedure. Few centers shared the same problematic spacers and these problematic spacers were scattered over the whole CRISPR locus (Mostly spacers 15, 14, 18, 37, 39, 40).</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>We confirm that classical spoligotyping is a robust method with generally a high reliability in most centers. The applied DNA extraction procedure (CTAB or thermolyzate) did not affect the results in this study. However performance was center-dependent, suggesting that training is a key component in quality assurance of spoligotyping. Overall, no particular spacer yielded a higher degree of deviating results, suggesting that errors occur randomly either in the process of re-using membranes, or during the reading of the results and transferring of data from the film to a digital file. Last, the performance of the microbead-based method was excellent as previously shown by Cowan <it>et al</it>. (J. Clin. Microbiol. 2004) and Zhang <it>et al</it>. (J. Med. Microbiol. 2009) and demonstrated the proper detection of spacer 15 that is known to occasionally give weak signals in the classical spoligotyping.</p> |
url |
http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2334/11/110 |
work_keys_str_mv |
AT garzellicarlo theuseofmicrobeadbasedspoligotypingforitmycobacteriumtuberculosisitcomplextoevaluatethequalityoftheconventionalmethodprovidingguidelinesforqualityassurancewhenworkingonmembranes AT rastoginalin theuseofmicrobeadbasedspoligotypingforitmycobacteriumtuberculosisitcomplextoevaluatethequalityoftheconventionalmethodprovidingguidelinesforqualityassurancewhenworkingonmembranes AT alhajojsahal theuseofmicrobeadbasedspoligotypingforitmycobacteriumtuberculosisitcomplextoevaluatethequalityoftheconventionalmethodprovidingguidelinesforqualityassurancewhenworkingonmembranes AT herranzmarta theuseofmicrobeadbasedspoligotypingforitmycobacteriumtuberculosisitcomplextoevaluatethequalityoftheconventionalmethodprovidingguidelinesforqualityassurancewhenworkingonmembranes AT deviedmadario theuseofmicrobeadbasedspoligotypingforitmycobacteriumtuberculosisitcomplextoevaluatethequalityoftheconventionalmethodprovidingguidelinesforqualityassurancewhenworkingonmembranes AT rasoloforazanamparanyvoahangy theuseofmicrobeadbasedspoligotypingforitmycobacteriumtuberculosisitcomplextoevaluatethequalityoftheconventionalmethodprovidingguidelinesforqualityassurancewhenworkingonmembranes AT stoffelskarolien theuseofmicrobeadbasedspoligotypingforitmycobacteriumtuberculosisitcomplextoevaluatethequalityoftheconventionalmethodprovidingguidelinesforqualityassurancewhenworkingonmembranes AT fauvilledufauxmaryse theuseofmicrobeadbasedspoligotypingforitmycobacteriumtuberculosisitcomplextoevaluatethequalityoftheconventionalmethodprovidingguidelinesforqualityassurancewhenworkingonmembranes AT eliasatina theuseofmicrobeadbasedspoligotypingforitmycobacteriumtuberculosisitcomplextoevaluatethequalityoftheconventionalmethodprovidingguidelinesforqualityassurancewhenworkingonmembranes AT gomesharrison theuseofmicrobeadbasedspoligotypingforitmycobacteriumtuberculosisitcomplextoevaluatethequalityoftheconventionalmethodprovidingguidelinesforqualityassurancewhenworkingonmembranes AT rigoutsleen theuseofmicrobeadbasedspoligotypingforitmycobacteriumtuberculosisitcomplextoevaluatethequalityoftheconventionalmethodprovidingguidelinesforqualityassurancewhenworkingonmembranes AT ruimyraymond theuseofmicrobeadbasedspoligotypingforitmycobacteriumtuberculosisitcomplextoevaluatethequalityoftheconventionalmethodprovidingguidelinesforqualityassurancewhenworkingonmembranes AT kremerkristin theuseofmicrobeadbasedspoligotypingforitmycobacteriumtuberculosisitcomplextoevaluatethequalityoftheconventionalmethodprovidingguidelinesforqualityassurancewhenworkingonmembranes AT ritaccoviviana theuseofmicrobeadbasedspoligotypingforitmycobacteriumtuberculosisitcomplextoevaluatethequalityoftheconventionalmethodprovidingguidelinesforqualityassurancewhenworkingonmembranes AT zhangjian theuseofmicrobeadbasedspoligotypingforitmycobacteriumtuberculosisitcomplextoevaluatethequalityoftheconventionalmethodprovidingguidelinesforqualityassurancewhenworkingonmembranes AT abadiaedgar theuseofmicrobeadbasedspoligotypingforitmycobacteriumtuberculosisitcomplextoevaluatethequalityoftheconventionalmethodprovidingguidelinesforqualityassurancewhenworkingonmembranes AT tortolienrico theuseofmicrobeadbasedspoligotypingforitmycobacteriumtuberculosisitcomplextoevaluatethequalityoftheconventionalmethodprovidingguidelinesforqualityassurancewhenworkingonmembranes AT suffysphilipn theuseofmicrobeadbasedspoligotypingforitmycobacteriumtuberculosisitcomplextoevaluatethequalityoftheconventionalmethodprovidingguidelinesforqualityassurancewhenworkingonmembranes AT vansoolingendick theuseofmicrobeadbasedspoligotypingforitmycobacteriumtuberculosisitcomplextoevaluatethequalityoftheconventionalmethodprovidingguidelinesforqualityassurancewhenworkingonmembranes AT refregierguislaine theuseofmicrobeadbasedspoligotypingforitmycobacteriumtuberculosisitcomplextoevaluatethequalityoftheconventionalmethodprovidingguidelinesforqualityassurancewhenworkingonmembranes AT solachristophe theuseofmicrobeadbasedspoligotypingforitmycobacteriumtuberculosisitcomplextoevaluatethequalityoftheconventionalmethodprovidingguidelinesforqualityassurancewhenworkingonmembranes AT garzellicarlo useofmicrobeadbasedspoligotypingforitmycobacteriumtuberculosisitcomplextoevaluatethequalityoftheconventionalmethodprovidingguidelinesforqualityassurancewhenworkingonmembranes AT rastoginalin useofmicrobeadbasedspoligotypingforitmycobacteriumtuberculosisitcomplextoevaluatethequalityoftheconventionalmethodprovidingguidelinesforqualityassurancewhenworkingonmembranes AT alhajojsahal useofmicrobeadbasedspoligotypingforitmycobacteriumtuberculosisitcomplextoevaluatethequalityoftheconventionalmethodprovidingguidelinesforqualityassurancewhenworkingonmembranes AT herranzmarta useofmicrobeadbasedspoligotypingforitmycobacteriumtuberculosisitcomplextoevaluatethequalityoftheconventionalmethodprovidingguidelinesforqualityassurancewhenworkingonmembranes AT deviedmadario useofmicrobeadbasedspoligotypingforitmycobacteriumtuberculosisitcomplextoevaluatethequalityoftheconventionalmethodprovidingguidelinesforqualityassurancewhenworkingonmembranes AT rasoloforazanamparanyvoahangy useofmicrobeadbasedspoligotypingforitmycobacteriumtuberculosisitcomplextoevaluatethequalityoftheconventionalmethodprovidingguidelinesforqualityassurancewhenworkingonmembranes AT stoffelskarolien useofmicrobeadbasedspoligotypingforitmycobacteriumtuberculosisitcomplextoevaluatethequalityoftheconventionalmethodprovidingguidelinesforqualityassurancewhenworkingonmembranes AT fauvilledufauxmaryse useofmicrobeadbasedspoligotypingforitmycobacteriumtuberculosisitcomplextoevaluatethequalityoftheconventionalmethodprovidingguidelinesforqualityassurancewhenworkingonmembranes AT eliasatina useofmicrobeadbasedspoligotypingforitmycobacteriumtuberculosisitcomplextoevaluatethequalityoftheconventionalmethodprovidingguidelinesforqualityassurancewhenworkingonmembranes AT gomesharrison useofmicrobeadbasedspoligotypingforitmycobacteriumtuberculosisitcomplextoevaluatethequalityoftheconventionalmethodprovidingguidelinesforqualityassurancewhenworkingonmembranes AT rigoutsleen useofmicrobeadbasedspoligotypingforitmycobacteriumtuberculosisitcomplextoevaluatethequalityoftheconventionalmethodprovidingguidelinesforqualityassurancewhenworkingonmembranes AT ruimyraymond useofmicrobeadbasedspoligotypingforitmycobacteriumtuberculosisitcomplextoevaluatethequalityoftheconventionalmethodprovidingguidelinesforqualityassurancewhenworkingonmembranes AT kremerkristin useofmicrobeadbasedspoligotypingforitmycobacteriumtuberculosisitcomplextoevaluatethequalityoftheconventionalmethodprovidingguidelinesforqualityassurancewhenworkingonmembranes AT ritaccoviviana useofmicrobeadbasedspoligotypingforitmycobacteriumtuberculosisitcomplextoevaluatethequalityoftheconventionalmethodprovidingguidelinesforqualityassurancewhenworkingonmembranes AT zhangjian useofmicrobeadbasedspoligotypingforitmycobacteriumtuberculosisitcomplextoevaluatethequalityoftheconventionalmethodprovidingguidelinesforqualityassurancewhenworkingonmembranes AT abadiaedgar useofmicrobeadbasedspoligotypingforitmycobacteriumtuberculosisitcomplextoevaluatethequalityoftheconventionalmethodprovidingguidelinesforqualityassurancewhenworkingonmembranes AT tortolienrico useofmicrobeadbasedspoligotypingforitmycobacteriumtuberculosisitcomplextoevaluatethequalityoftheconventionalmethodprovidingguidelinesforqualityassurancewhenworkingonmembranes AT suffysphilipn useofmicrobeadbasedspoligotypingforitmycobacteriumtuberculosisitcomplextoevaluatethequalityoftheconventionalmethodprovidingguidelinesforqualityassurancewhenworkingonmembranes AT vansoolingendick useofmicrobeadbasedspoligotypingforitmycobacteriumtuberculosisitcomplextoevaluatethequalityoftheconventionalmethodprovidingguidelinesforqualityassurancewhenworkingonmembranes AT refregierguislaine useofmicrobeadbasedspoligotypingforitmycobacteriumtuberculosisitcomplextoevaluatethequalityoftheconventionalmethodprovidingguidelinesforqualityassurancewhenworkingonmembranes AT solachristophe useofmicrobeadbasedspoligotypingforitmycobacteriumtuberculosisitcomplextoevaluatethequalityoftheconventionalmethodprovidingguidelinesforqualityassurancewhenworkingonmembranes |
_version_ |
1725129015951360000 |