Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26231786›Full record

ArticleJournal of virological methods2015

Multiplexed one-step RT-PCR VP7 and VP4 genotyping assays for rotaviruses using updated primers.

Mathew D Esona, Rashi Gautam, Ka Ian Tam, Alice Williams, Slavica Mijatovic-Rustempasic, Michael D Bowen

Abstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of virological methods, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Genetic diversity of G9, G3, G8 and G1 rotavirus group A strains circulating among children with acute gastroenteritis in Vietnam from 2016 to 2021.Infection, genetics and evolution : journal of molecular epidemiology and evolutionary genetics in infectious diseases · 2024
    Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Mathew D EsonaGastroenteritis and Respiratory Viruses Laboratory Branch, Division of Viral Diseases, NCIRD, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA 30329, USA. Electronic address: mdi4@cdc.gov.
Rashi GautamGastroenteritis and Respiratory Viruses Laboratory Branch, Division of Viral Diseases, NCIRD, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA 30329, USA.
Ka Ian TamGastroenteritis and Respiratory Viruses Laboratory Branch, Division of Viral Diseases, NCIRD, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA 30329, USA.
Alice WilliamsFurman University, Greenville, SC, USA.
Slavica Mijatovic-RustempasicGastroenteritis and Respiratory Viruses Laboratory Branch, Division of Viral Diseases, NCIRD, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA 30329, USA.
Michael D BowenGastroenteritis and Respiratory Viruses Laboratory Branch, Division of Viral Diseases, NCIRD, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA 30329, USA.

Funding

Intramural CDC HHS CC999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The current two-step VP7 and VP4 genotyping RT-PCR assays for rotaviruses have been linked consistently to genotyping failure in an estimated 30% of RVA positive samples worldwide. We have developed a VP7 and VP4 multiplexed one-step genotyping assays using updated primers generated from contemporary VP7 and VP4 sequences. To determine assay specificity and sensitivity, 17 reference virus strains, 6 non-target gastroenteritis viruses and 725 clinical samples carrying the most common VP7 (G1, G2, G3, G4, G9, and G12) and VP4 (P[4], P[6], P[8], P[9] and P[10]) genotypes were tested in this study. All reference RVA strain targets yielded amplicons of the expected sizes and non-target genotypes and gastroenteritis viruses were not detected by either assay. Out of the 725 clinical samples tested, the VP7 and VP4 assays were able to assigned specific genotypes to 711 (98.1%) and 714 (98.5%), respectively. The remaining unassigned samples were re-tested for RVA antigen using EIA and qRT-PCR assays and all were found to be negative. The overall specificity, sensitivity and limit of detection of the VP7 assay were in the ranges of 99.0-100%, 94.0-100% and 8.6×10(1) to 8.6×10(2) copies of RNA/reaction, respectively. For the VP4 assay, the overall specificity, sensitivity and limit of detection assay were in the ranges of 100%, 94.0-100% and ≤1 to 8.6×10(2) copies of RNA/reaction, respectively. Here we report two highly robust, accurate, efficient, affordable and documentable gel-based genotyping systems which are capable of genotyping 97.8% of the six common VP7 and 98.3% of the five common VP4 genotypes of RVA strains which are responsible for approximately 88.2% of all RVA infections worldwide.

Indexed as

Antigens, ViralCapsid ProteinsDNA PrimersGenotyping TechniquesHumansMultiplex Polymerase Chain ReactionReverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain ReactionRotavirusSensitivity and SpecificityAntigens, ViralCapsid ProteinsDNA PrimersVP4 protein, RotavirusVP7 protein, RotavirusRotavirusUpdated primersVP7 and VP4 genes multiplexed gel-based genotyping

Identifiers

PMID26231786
PMCPMC5818709

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.