Rhinovirus detection using probes from the 5′ and 3′ end of the genome

Forsyth, M.; Al‐Nakib, W.; Chadwick, Patricia; Stanway, Glyn; Hughes, Pamda J.; Leckie, Gregor; Almond, Jeffrey W.; Tyrrell, D. A. J.

doi:10.1007/bf01313878

Cited by 7 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The specificity of our cDNA rhinovirus probes has been extensively established with regards to reaction with nucleic acids obtained from other viruses and human cells (Al-Nakib et al, 1986Forsyth et al, 1989). Furthermore, in this study, all serial nasal washing samples obtained from volunteers infected with coronavirus 229E-like virus and which contained coronavirus as demonstrated by virus isolation and RNA hybridization were consistently negative for rhinovirus RNA by ISH.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 57%

Detection of rhinovirus RNA in nasal epithelial cells by in situ hybridization

Bruce¹,

Chadwick²,

Al‐Nakib

1990

Journal of Virological Methods

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper describes the development and evaluation of in situ hybridization (ISH) for the detection of rhinovirus in cells obtained from nasal washings of volunteers infected with human rhinovirus 14 (HRV-14). Twenty-five (66%) and 27 (71%) of 38 volunteers inoculated with HRV-14 had evidence of infection by virus isolation and ISH, respectively, on at least one of 4 days investigated after virus challenge. In contrast, only 14 of 38 (37%) volunteers had significant antibody rises as detected by the neutralization test. Of the 38 volunteers inoculated with HRV-14, only 13 (34%) had symptoms of colds. Of these, 12 (92%) and 10 (77%) were positive by virus isolation or ISH, respectively, on at least one day. Six (46%) had significant antibody rises by neutralization. Similarly, of the 38 volunteers challenged, 22 (58%) were asymptomatic and of these 10 (45.5%) and 12 (54.5%) were positive by virus isolation and ISH, respectively, on at least one day. Only 8 (36.4%) of these asymptomatic volunteers showed significant antibody rises by neutralization. There were significant associations between the detection of rhinoviruses by ISH and virus isolation on the third day (P less than 0.025) after virus challenge in the group as a whole and in the symptomatic group. These results show that generally rhinovirus detection by ISH compares well with virus isolation and both tests are clearly more sensitive than the neutralization test in detecting evidence of infection. It is concluded that ISH is an interesting new technique that may play an important role in the study of rhinovirus infection and pathogenesis.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 57%

Detection of rhinovirus RNA in nasal epithelial cells by in situ hybridization

Bruce¹,

Chadwick²,

Al‐Nakib

1990

Journal of Virological Methods

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Molecular biological methods. Initial attempts at diagnosis using cDNA probes from the 5' and 3' non-coding regions were disappointing due to poor binding to a large number of serotypes [41]. Given the marked sequence variations between different serotypes in this region (Fig.…”

Section: Diagnosismentioning

confidence: 99%

Viruses as precipitants of asthma symptoms III. Rhinoviruses: molecular biology and prospects for future intervention

Johnston¹,

Bardin²,

Pattemore

1993

Clin Experimental Allergy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Culturing the virus and serotyping by conventional methods [3,9] is both time consuming and, in some cases, very difficult due to the poor growth of some serotypes in tissue culture systems. It has been shown that eDNA probes complementary to the 3' end of a rhinovirus genome can bind very specifically [4] and a bank of such probes could presumably be used to type a virus, although a large panel of reagents would be required. We have recently applied the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) to the detection of rhinoviruses in clinical samples I-5, 6] and showed that in principle, one pair of oligonucleotides can be used for any rhinovirus.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

A novel method of typing rhinoviruses using the product of a polymerase chain reaction

Bruce¹,

Gama

Hughes

et al. 1990

Archives of Virology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

At present rhinoviruses are detected and serotyped in tissue cultures, a slow and laborious process. Previously we have described how the polymerase chain reaction can be used as a rapid method for detecting the presence of a rhinovirus, or enterovirus, in clinical samples without the need to culture. Here we describe a new method which uses the product of the polymerase chain reaction to determine the type of the rhinovirus. The technique is rapid and simple and should eventually greatly facilitate studies on rhinovirus infections.

show abstract

Rhinovirus detection using probes from the 5′ and 3′ end of the genome

Cited by 7 publications

References 16 publications

Detection of rhinovirus RNA in nasal epithelial cells by in situ hybridization

Detection of rhinovirus RNA in nasal epithelial cells by in situ hybridization

Viruses as precipitants of asthma symptoms III. Rhinoviruses: molecular biology and prospects for future intervention

A novel method of typing rhinoviruses using the product of a polymerase chain reaction

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About