Improving molecular detection of fungal DNA in formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissues: comparison of five tissue DNA extraction methods using panfungal PCR.
DNA extraction from formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) tissues is difficult and requires special protocols in order to extract small amounts of DNA suitable for amplification. Most described methods report an amplification success rate between 60 and 80%; therefore, there is a need to improve molecular detection and identification of fungi in FFPE tissue. Eighty-one archived FFPE tissues with a positive Gomori methenamine silver (GMS) stain were evaluated using five different commercial DNA extraction kits with some modifications. Three different panfungal PCR assays were used to detect fungal DNA, and two housekeeping genes were used to assess the presence of amplifiable DNA and to detect PCR inhibitors. The sensitivities of the five extraction protocols were compared, and the quality of DNA detection (calculated for each kit as the number of housekeeping gene PCR-positive samples divided by the total number of samples) was 60 to 91% among the five protocols. The efficiencies of the three different panfungals used (calculated as the number of panfungal-PCR-positive samples divided by the number of housekeeping gene PCR-positive samples) were 58 to 93%. The panfungal PCR using internal transcribed spacer 3 (ITS3) and ITS4 primers yielded a product in most FFPE tissues. Two of the five DNA extraction kits (from TaKaRa and Qiagen) showed similar and promising results. However, one method (TaKaRa) could extract fungal DNA from 69 of the 74 FFPE tissues from which a housekeeping gene could be amplified and was also cost-effective, with a nonlaborious protocol. Factors such as sensitivity, cost, and labor will help guide the selection of the most appropriate method for the needs of each laboratory.
Muñoz-Cadavid
C
C
Mycotic Diseases Branch, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
Rudd
S
S
Zaki
S R
SR
Patel
M
M
Moser
S A
SA
Brandt
M E
ME
Gómez
B L
BL
D004271:DNA, Fungal / Q000235:genetics / Q000302:isolation & purification*; D021903:DNA, Ribosomal Spacer / Q000235:genetics / Q000302:isolation & purification; D005658:Fungi / Q000145:classification / Q000235:genetics / Q000302:isolation & purification*; D006801:Humans; D009181:Mycoses / Q000175:diagnosis*; D016612:Paraffin Embedding; D057089:Pathology, Molecular / Q000379:methods*; D016133:Polymerase Chain Reaction / Q000379:methods*; D012680:Sensitivity and Specificity; D016707:Tissue Fixation
D004271:DNA, Fungal; D021903:DNA, Ribosomal Spacer
Clin Infect Dis. 2007 Apr 15;44(8):1078-83
17366453
Appl Immunohistochem Mol Morphol. 2002 Sep;10(3):269-74
12373156
J Clin Microbiol. 2009 Jun;47(6):1650-6
19386856
Diagn Mol Pathol. 1996 Sep;5(3):220-4
8866237
J Clin Pathol. 2005 Nov;58(11):1180-4
16254108
Cancer Detect Prev. 2003;27(5):397-404
14585327
J Clin Microbiol. 2008 Jul;46(7):2353-8
18480229
J Heart Lung Transplant. 1998 Mar;17(3):321-4
9563611
J Clin Microbiol. 2001 Apr;39(4):1506-9
11283078
J Clin Microbiol. 2003 Jan;41(1):205-8
12517849
J Vet Diagn Invest. 1996 Jan;8(1):68-75
9026084
BMC Clin Pathol. 2004 Feb 12;4(1):1
15028125
Clin Infect Dis. 1996 May;22 Suppl 2:S112-8
8722837
Am J Clin Pathol. 1991 Feb;95(2):117-24
1846996
Mol Pathol. 2003 Dec;56(6):368-70
14645701
J Clin Microbiol. 2007 Feb;45(2):380-5
17122000
Clin Infect Dis. 2006 Jan 1;42(1):51-6
16323091
Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 2006 Jan;25(1):8-13
16416267
J Clin Pathol. 2005 Aug;58(8):894-5
16049299
J Clin Microbiol. 2002 May;40(5):1644-7
11980934
J Clin Microbiol. 2006 Feb;44(2):340-9
16455881
BMC Genomics. 2006 Dec 12;7:312
17156491
Am J Clin Pathol. 2009 Mar;131(3):364-75
19228642
J Clin Microbiol. 1999 Dec;37(12):3957-64
10565914
Vet Pathol. 1996 Mar;33(2):176-83
8801711
J Clin Microbiol. 2000 Jun;38(6):2302-10
10834993