Comparative evaluation of published real-time PCR assays for the detection of malaria following MIQE guidelines

Abstract

BackgroundThe use of malaria-specific quantitative real-time PCR (qPCR) is increasing due to its high sensitivity, speciation and quantification of malaria parasites. However, due to the lack of consensus or standardized methods in performing qPCR, it is difficult to evaluate and/or compare the quality of work reported by different authors for a cross-study and/or cross-platform assay analysis.MethodsThe performances of seven published qPCR assays that detect Plasmodium spp or Plasmodium falciparum were compared using standard DNA and samples from a clinical trial. Amplification and qPCR measurements were performed using the Applied Biosystems 7500 Fast Real-Time PCR System. All the analyses were automatically established using the default settings. For the TaqMan probe format, the assays were performed in the background of QuantiFast Probe Master Mix whereas in SYBR Green format, the assays were performed in the background of QuantiFast SYBR Green Master Mix and QuantiTect SYBR Green Master Mix background.ResultsAssays with high PCR efficiencies outperformed those with low efficiencies in all categories including sensitivity, precision and consistency regardless of the assay format and background. With the exception of one assay, all assays evaluated showed lower sensitivity compared to what have been published. When samples from a malaria challenge study were analysed, the qPCR assay with the overall best performance detected parasites in subjects earliest and with most consistency.ConclusionThe data demonstrate the need for increased consensus and guidelines that will encourage better experimental practices, allowing more consistent and unambiguous interpretation of qPCR results.

Cross-Institute Evaluations of Inhibitor-Resistant PCR Reagents for Direct Testing of Aerosol and Blood Samples Containing Biological Warfare Agent DNA

“…It was striking to observe the different LoDs from individual PCRs conducted in different chemistries, as well as the effects of different inhibitors on LoDs. A recent study (32) in which seven PCR assays for the malaria parasite Plasmodium falciparum were tested under standardized conditions showed better performance (in terms of LoD, precision, and consistency) for higher-efficiency than for lower-efficiency PCRs. It would therefore seem intuitive that to fully exploit the inhibitor resistance of a given reagent, and to narrow the gap in performance between different assays, PCRs with high efficiency, which have also been fully optimized with the chosen master mix, should be used.…”

Comparative evaluation of fluorescent in situ hybridization and Giemsa microscopy with quantitative real-time PCR technique in detecting malaria parasites in a holoendemic region of Kenya

“…The PCR method can detect sub-microscopic parasites and has been shown to have a lower detection limit of 0.002–30 parasites/µL for monoplex assays while the multiplex assays have been shown to have a limit of 0.2–5 parasites/µL [16]. The present study highlights that the agreement level between the three methods was very low (Fig.…”

Magnetically-enabled biomarker extraction and delivery system: towards integrated ASSURED diagnostic tools

“…Additionally, while some current lab-based assays such as PCR or ELISA can approach this level of sensitivity, unlike LFAs, they cannot be deployed at scale or in low resource settings where elimination campaigns will operate. 45 …”