Validation of nested PCR and a selective biochemical method as alternatives for mycoplasma detection
- PMID: 20806253
- DOI: 10.1002/jobm.201000066
Validation of nested PCR and a selective biochemical method as alternatives for mycoplasma detection
Abstract
Direct culture is the most common way to reliably detect mycoplasma, but it is not practical for the qualitative control of cell therapeutics because of the elaborate culture medium, the prolonged incubation time, and the large sample volumes. Here, we chose two alternative methods using commercial detection kits, the PCR mycoplasma detection kit with nested PCR and the selective biochemical method, MycoAlert(®), and validated them with the direct culture method as a reference. We tested eight mycoplasma species and five validation parameters: specificity, detection limit, robustness, repeatability, and ruggedness, based on the regulatory guidelines in the US Pharmacopoeia. All experiments were performed using fibroblasts spiked with mycoplasma. Specificity tests for both methods included all mycoplasma species, except Mycoplasma pneumonia and M. genitalium for the nested PCR and Ureaplasma urealyticum for the MycoAlert(®) assay. Regarding the detection limit, the nested PCR proved to be as sensitive as the direct culture method and more sensitive than the MycoAlert(®) assay. The predicted median for probit = 0.9 was 54 (44-76) CFU/ml for M. hyorhinis and 16 (13-23) CFU/ml for M. hominis by the nested PCR, but 431 (346-593) CFU/ml and 105 (87-142) CFU/ml, respectively, with MycoAlert(®). Changes in the concentration of reagents, reagent lot, or individual analysts did not influence the results of the examined methods. The results of this study support nested PCR as a valuable alternative for mycoplasma detection.
Copyright © 2011 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim.
Similar articles
-
Validation of a PCR method for the detection of mycoplasmas according to European Pharmacopoeia section 2.6.7.Biologicals. 2010 Mar;38(2):232-7. doi: 10.1016/j.biologicals.2009.11.003. Epub 2010 Feb 10. Biologicals. 2010. PMID: 20149967
-
DNA probes and PCR in diagnosis of mycoplasma infections.Mol Cell Probes. 1994 Dec;8(6):497-511. doi: 10.1006/mcpr.1994.1071. Mol Cell Probes. 1994. PMID: 7700272 Review.
-
Development of a PCR method for mycoplasma testing of Chinese hamster ovary cell cultures used in the manufacture of recombinant therapeutic proteins.Biologicals. 2004 Dec;32(4):183-93. doi: 10.1016/j.biologicals.2004.08.005. Biologicals. 2004. PMID: 15572100
-
Introduction of a validation concept for a PCR-based Mycoplasma detection assay.Cytotherapy. 2006;8(1):62-9. doi: 10.1080/14653240500518413. Cytotherapy. 2006. PMID: 16627346
-
Mycoplasma testing of cell substrates and biologics: Review of alternative non-microbiological techniques.Mol Cell Probes. 2011 Apr-Jun;25(2-3):69-77. doi: 10.1016/j.mcp.2011.01.002. Epub 2011 Jan 11. Mol Cell Probes. 2011. PMID: 21232597 Review.
Cited by
-
Real-time PCR assay is superior to other methods for the detection of mycoplasma contamination in the cell lines of the National Cell Bank of Iran.Cytotechnology. 2016 Aug;68(4):1063-80. doi: 10.1007/s10616-015-9862-0. Epub 2015 Mar 6. Cytotechnology. 2016. PMID: 25742733 Free PMC article.
-
Sensitivity of biochemical test in comparison with other methods for the detection of mycoplasma contamination in human and animal cell lines stored in the National Cell Bank of Iran.Cytotechnology. 2014 Oct;66(5):861-73. doi: 10.1007/s10616-013-9640-9. Epub 2014 Feb 4. Cytotechnology. 2014. PMID: 24493067 Free PMC article.
-
Effectiveness of Plasmocure™ in Elimination of Mycoplasma Species from Contaminated Cell Cultures: A Comparative Study versus other Antibiotics.Cell J. 2019 Jul;21(2):143-149. doi: 10.22074/cellj.2019.5996. Epub 2019 Feb 20. Cell J. 2019. PMID: 30825287 Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources