2013
DOI: 10.1099/vir.0.053041-0
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Role of the line probe assay INNO-LiPA HBV DR and ultradeep pyrosequencing in detecting resistance mutations to nucleoside/nucleotide analogues in viral samples isolated from chronic hepatitis B patients

Abstract: Despite the effectiveness of nucleoside/nucleotide analogues in the treatment of chronic hepatitis B (CHB), their long-term administration is associated with the emergence of resistant hepatitis B virus (HBV) mutants. In this study, mutations resulting in antiviral resistance in HBV DNA samples isolated from 23 CHB patients (nine treatment naïve and 14 treated previously) were studied using a line probe assay (INNO-LiPA HBV DR; Innogenetics) and ultradeep pyrosequencing (UDPS) methods. Whilst the INNO-LiPA HBV… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
5

Citation Types

0
7
0

Year Published

2014
2014
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 8 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 24 publications
0
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…First, the fragment amplified for NGS is different from the fragment analyzed by LiPA; and second, the two techniques have methodological differences: NGS is a sequencing method and the definition of the genotype is obtained by phylogenesis, whereas LiPA is a hybridization method and therefore, an indirect measurement. Inconsistencies between LiPA and UDPS have been described in HCV genotyping [ 38 ] and HBV variant resistance detection [ 39 ].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…First, the fragment amplified for NGS is different from the fragment analyzed by LiPA; and second, the two techniques have methodological differences: NGS is a sequencing method and the definition of the genotype is obtained by phylogenesis, whereas LiPA is a hybridization method and therefore, an indirect measurement. Inconsistencies between LiPA and UDPS have been described in HCV genotyping [ 38 ] and HBV variant resistance detection [ 39 ].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Several studies have demonstrated the higher relative sensitivity of ultra-deep sequencing compared with conventional direct-population sequencing. Therefore, ultra-deep sequencing is useful for detecting low-frequency drug-resistant mutations that cannot be detected with standard methods [18,19,20,21]. Conventional sequencing based on the Sanger method can only detect mutations present in >20% of viral quasispecies.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Conventional sequencing based on the Sanger method can only detect mutations present in >20% of viral quasispecies. Although the line probe assay is another common and convenient method to detect mutations, it can only detect mutations present in >15% of viral quasispecies [20]. Cloning-based sequencing methods are also commonly used, but they usually detect less than 50% of the substitutions identified with ultra-deep sequencing [21].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Although the line probe assay INNO‐LiPA HBV DR is also capable of detecting variants down to 5% of the mixture population, it does not provide the quantitative data of the mixture sequences. Solmone et al and Mese et al reported that ultradeep pyrosequencing (UDPS) has a higher sensitivity than the direct sequencing and line probe assay. Solmone et al used UDPS to investigate the HBV quasispecies in reverse transcriptase and surface region while Mese et al did the whole‐genome analysis of HBV sequences.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Although the line probe assay INNO-LiPA HBV DR is also capable of detecting variants down to 5% of the mixture population, 22 showed that UDPS provides a high quantity of information for both known and novel mutations. However, currently the assay is costly, so it is not practical for clinical practice.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%