Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2003 Apr;41(4):1558-64.
doi: 10.1128/JCM.41.4.1558-1564.2003.

Clinical evaluation of two methods for genotyping hepatitis C virus based on analysis of the 5' noncoding region

Affiliations
Comparative Study

Clinical evaluation of two methods for genotyping hepatitis C virus based on analysis of the 5' noncoding region

Frederick S Nolte et al. J Clin Microbiol. 2003 Apr.

Abstract

We compared the performance characteristics of a standardized direct sequencing method (TRUGENE HCV 5'NC; Visible Genetics Inc., Toronto, Ontario, Canada) and a reverse hybridization line probe assay (INNO-LiPA HCV II; Bayer Corp., Tarrytown, N.Y.) for genotyping of hepatitis C virus (HCV). Both methods are based on detection of sequence heterogeneity in the 5' noncoding (5'NC) region. Concordance between the genotyping methods was assessed by testing 172 samples representing the six major genotypes. Sequence analysis of the more phylogenetically informative nonstructural 5B (NS5B) region was also done with 148 (86%) samples to confirm the accuracy of and resolve discrepancies between the 5'NC genotyping results. The sensitivities of the methods were assessed by using the 5'NC amplicon from both the qualitative and quantitative AMPLICOR HCV tests (Roche Diagnostics Corp., Indianapolis, Ind.). The ability of the methods to detect mixed-genotype infections was determined with mixtures of two different genotypes at relative concentrations ranging from 1 to 50%. Both 5'NC methods were able to genotype 99.4% of the samples with type agreement for 99.5% and subtype agreement for 68.2% of the samples. No or ambiguous subtype results were found by the line probe assay for 16.5% and by the TRUGENE 5'NC test for 17.1% of the samples. Discrepancies occurred between the line probe assay and NS5B results at the type level for 1.4% of the samples and at the subtype level for 14.2% of the samples. Discrepancies also occurred between the TRUGENE 5'NC and NS5B results at the type level for 2% of the samples and at the subtype level for 8.1% of the samples. We also found two distinct strains of HCV classified as type 2 by analysis of the 5'NC region that were type 1 by analysis of the NS5B region. The sensitivities of the two 5'NC genotyping methods were comparable and dependent on the amplification test used ( approximately 10(3) IU/ml with the qualitative HCV RNA tests and approximately 10(5) IU/ml with the quantitative HCV RNA tests). Genotype mixtures were successfully identified at a relative concentration of 5% by the line probe assay and 10% by the TRUGENE 5'NC test. In conclusion, the performance characteristics of the 5'NC methods were similar and both methods produced accurate results at the genotype level but neither method should be used for subtyping.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

FIG. 1.
FIG. 1.
Alignment of HCV genotype 1 and 2 consensus nucleotide sequences with sequences obtained from two samples (601592 and 732829) with discrepant genotypes as determined by analysis of partial 5′NC and NS5B sequences. The nucleotide numbering is based on the HCV type 1 genome sequence (GenBank accession number M62321). *, same nucleotide at that position for all sequences; shaded box, phylogenetically informative position; R = A or G; M = A or C; W = A or T; S = G or C; K = G or T; Y = C or T; B = C, G, or T; D = A, C, or T; H = A, C, or T; V = A, C, or G; N = A, C, G, or T.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. American Medical Association. 2001. Current procedural terminology 2002. American Medical Association, Chicago, Ill.
    1. Ansaldi, F., F. Torre, B. M. Bruzzone, A. Picciotto, P. Crovari, and G. Icardi. 2001. Evaluation of a new hepatitis C virus sequencing assay as a routine method for genotyping. J. Med. Virol. 63:17-21. - PubMed
    1. Chen, Z., and K. E. Weck. 2002. Hepatitis C virus genotyping: interrogation of the 5′ untranslated region cannot accurately distinguish genotypes 1a and 1b. J. Clin. Microbiol. 40:3127-3134. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Choo, Q. L., K. H. Richman, J. H. Han, K. Berger, C. Lee, C. Dong, C. Gallegos, D. Coit, R. Medina-Selby, P. J. Barr, A. J. Weiner, D. W. Bradley, G. Kuo, and M. Houghton. 1991. Genetic organization and diversity of the hepatitis C virus. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 88:2451-2455. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Dixit, V., S. Quan, P. Martin, D. Larson, M. Brezina, R. DiNello, K. Sra, J. Y. Lau, D. Chien, and J. Kolberg. 1995. Evaluation of a novel serotyping system for hepatitis C virus: strong correlation with standard genotyping methodologies. J. Clin. Microbiol. 33:2978-2983. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms

Substances

LinkOut - more resources