Real-time PCR (rt-PCR) is a widely used molecular method for detection of Neisseria meningitidis (Nm). Several rt-PCR assays for Nm target the capsule transport gene, ctrA. However, over 16% of meningococcal carriage isolates lack ctrA, rendering this target gene ineffective at identification of this sub-population of meningococcal isolates. The Cu-Zn superoxide dismutase gene, sodC, is found in Nm but not in other Neisseria species. To better identify Nm, regardless of capsule genotype or expression status, a sodC-based TaqMan rt-PCR assay was developed and validated. Standard curves revealed an average lower limit of detection of 73 genomes per reaction at cycle threshold (Ct) value of 35, with 100% average reaction efficiency and an average R2 of 0.9925. 99.7% (624/626) of Nm isolates tested were sodC-positive, with a range of average Ct values from 13.0 to 29.5. The mean sodC Ct value of these Nm isolates was 17.6±2.2 (±SD). Of the 626 Nm tested, 178 were nongroupable (NG) ctrA-negative Nm isolates, and 98.9% (176/178) of these were detected by sodC rt-PCR. The assay was 100% specific, with all 244 non-Nm isolates testing negative. Of 157 clinical specimens tested, sodC detected 25/157 Nm or 4 additional specimens compared to ctrA and 24 more than culture. Among 582 carriage specimens, sodC detected Nm in 1 more than ctrA and in 4 more than culture. This sodC rt-PCR assay is a highly sensitive and specific method for detection of Nm, especially in carriage studies where many meningococcal isolates lack capsule genes.

Research on human cadavers is an important mechanism of scientific progress and comprises a large industry in the United States. However, despite its importance and influence, there is little ethical or regulatory oversight of cadaver-based research. This lack of transparency raises important ethical questions. Thus, this paper serves as a call for ethicists and regulators to pay increased attention to cadaver research. I argue that cadaver research ought to be considered a subset of human subjects research and held accountable to higher ethical standards. After describing current practices, I argue that oversight of cadaver research as a form of human subjects research is appropriate because cadaver research is similar to other types of human research, participants in cadaver research incur risks of harm, and a current lack of oversight has allowed the cadaver industry to entice research participation through ethically questionable practices. This paper urges greater dialogue among human subjects research ethicists and regulators about what constitutes appropriate protections for participants in cadaver research.