Comparison of nucleic acid extraction platforms for detection of select biothreat agents for use in clinical resource limited settings.

High-quality nucleic acids are critical for optimal PCR-based diagnostics and pathogen detection. Rapid sample processing time is important for the earliest administration of therapeutic and containment measures, especially in the case of biothreat agents. In this context, we compared the Fujifilm QuickGene-Mini80 to Qiagen's QIAamp Mini Purification kits for extraction of DNA and RNA for potential use in austere settings. Qiagen (QIAamp) column-based extraction is the currently recommended purification platform by United States Army Medical Research Institute for Infectious Diseases for both DNA and RNA extraction. However, this sample processing system requires dedicated laboratory equipment including a centrifuge. In this study, we investigated the QuickGene-Mini80, which does not require centrifugation, as a suitable platform for nucleic acid extraction for use in resource-limited locations. Quality of the sample extraction was evaluated using pathogen-specific, real-time PCR assays for nucleic acids extracted from viable and γ-irradiated Bacillus anthracis, Yersinia pestis, vaccinia virus, Venezuelan equine encephalitis virus, or B. anthracis spores in buffer or human whole blood. QuickGene-Mini80 and QIAamp performed similarly for DNA extraction regardless of organism viability. It was noteworthy that γ-irradiation did not have a significant impact on real-time PCR for organism detection. Comparison with QIAamp showed a less than adequate performance of the Fujifilm instrument for RNA extraction. However, QuickGene-Mini80 remains a viable alternative to QIAamp for DNA extraction for use in remote settings due to extraction quality, time efficiency, reduced instrument requirements, and ease of use.

Detection of biological threat agents by real-time PCR: comparison of assay performance on the R.A.P.I.D., the LightCycler, and the Smart Cycler platforms.

BACKGROUND: Rapid detection of biological threat agents is critical for timely therapeutic administration. Fluorogenic PCR provides a rapid, sensitive, and specific tool for molecular identification of these agents. We compared the performance of assays for 7 biological threat agents on the Idaho Technology, Inc. R.A.P.I.D., the Roche LightCycler, and the Cepheid Smart Cycler. METHODS: Real-time PCR primers and dual-labeled fluorogenic probes were designed to detect Bacillus anthracis, Brucella species, Clostridium botulinum, Coxiella burnetii, Francisella tularensis, Staphylococcus aureus, and Yersinia pestis. DNA amplification assays were optimized by use of Idaho Technology buffers and deoxynucleotide triphosphates supplemented with Invitrogen Platinum Taq DNA polymerase, and were subsequently tested for sensitivity and specificity on the R.A.P.I.D., the LightCycler, and the Smart Cycler. RESULTS: Limit of detection experiments indicated that assay performance was comparable among the platforms tested. Exclusivity and inclusivity testing with a general bacterial nucleic acid cross-reactivity panel containing 60 DNAs and agent-specific panels containing nearest neighbors for the organisms of interest indicated that all assays were specific for their intended targets. CONCLUSION: With minor supplementation, such as the addition of Smart Cycler Additive Reagent to the Idaho Technology buffers, assays for DNA templates from biological threat agents demonstrated similar performance, sensitivity, and specificity on all 3 platforms.