Open Access

Advances in the application of molecular diagnostic techniques for the detection of infectious disease pathogens (Review)

  • Authors:
    • Qingqing Liu
    • Xiaojuan Jin
    • Jun Cheng
    • Huajun Zhou
    • Yingjie Zhang
    • Yuzhu Dai
  • View Affiliations

  • Published online on: April 3, 2023     https://doi.org/10.3892/mmr.2023.12991
  • Article Number: 104
  • Copyright: © Liu et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of Creative Commons Attribution License.

Metrics: Total Views: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )
Total PDF Downloads: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )


Abstract

Infectious diseases are a major global cause of morbidity and mortality, seriously affecting public health and socioeconomic stability. Since infectious diseases can be caused by a wide variety of pathogens with similar clinical manifestations and symptoms that are difficult to accurately distinguish, selecting the appropriate diagnostic techniques for the rapid identification of pathogens is crucial for clinical disease diagnosis and public health management. However, traditional diagnostic techniques have low detection rates, long detection times and limited automation, which means that they do not meet the requirements for rapid diagnosis. Recent years have seen continuous developments in molecular detection technology, which has a higher sensitivity and specificity, shorter detection time and increased automation, and performs an important role in the early and rapid detection of infectious disease pathogens. The present study summarizes recent progress in molecular diagnostic technologies such as PCR, isothermal amplification, gene chips and high‑throughput sequencing for the detection of infectious disease pathogens, and compares the technical principles, advantages and disadvantages, applicability and costs of these diagnostic techniques.

Introduction

Infectious diseases, which can be caused by a variety of bacteria, viruses, parasites and fungi, are one of the leading causes of morbidity and mortality worldwide (1,2). According to recent statistics, there are ~60 million deaths worldwide annually, at least 25% of which are caused by infectious diseases (3). The emergence of infectious diseases has created great challenges to public health and socioeconomic stability. Although the use of vaccines and antimicrobial and antiviral drugs can help combat infections to a certain extent, their efficacy can decrease with the emergence of new infectious agents and unknown drug-resistant pathogens (4,5). In addition, the development of vaccines and medicines requires lengthy clinical trials, which does not allow for the rapid and effective control of infectious diseases (6). In the absence of specific vaccines and drugs, the selection of appropriate detection techniques for the rapid and accurate identification of pathogens is the most effective means of dealing with infectious diseases, which can improve the efficiency of treatment for infectious diseases and reduce their spread, leading to a rapid response to serious public health events (7).

Traditional diagnostic techniques include microbial culture, hemagglutination inhibition tests and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISAs). Of these, the culture of pathogenic microorganisms is the most time-consuming and their identification is mainly based on morphological characteristics, with low specificity and sensitivity. In addition, immunological methods such as hemagglutination inhibition assays and ELISAs, used for the detection of pathogen-specific antibodies or antigens, are simple to perform; however, they have disadvantages such as high false-positives, high cost and poor thermal stability (8,9). With the continuous development of genetic and genomic research, molecular diagnostic techniques focused on nucleic acid detection have provided new methods for the diagnosis of infectious diseases, with a short turnaround time and high sensitivity. Molecular diagnostic techniques can not only detect multiple pathogens, but can also analyze drug resistance genes of pathogens and pathogen homology analysis, and have gradually become an important tool in the early diagnosis of infectious diseases (1012). At present, the commonly used molecular diagnostic techniques for infectious diseases include PCR, isothermal amplification reaction, gene chip technology and high-throughput sequencing technology.

PCR

Since 1985, PCR has become the most widely used nucleic acid amplification method for pathogen detection (13). With the development of PCR technology, molecular diagnostic techniques such as quantitative PCR (qPCR), digital PCR (dPCR) and high-resolution melting (HRM) based on the principle of conventional PCR (cPCR) have been widely used for the rapid and straightforward identification and drug resistance detection of known infectious disease pathogens (1416). PCR performs an important role in the early diagnosis of infectious diseases.

qPCR

qPCR uses fluorescently labeled probes or double-stranded DNA-specific fluorescent dye to qualitatively and quantitatively analyze the fluorescence signal of amplification products in real time without the need to detect PCR products through complex electrophoresis steps (Fig. 1). This method is more automated and has a lower risk of contamination compared with cPCR (17). qPCR has been widely used for the early diagnosis and drug resistance detection of common clinical pathogens (18) and has the advantages of higher sensitivity, specificity, simplicity and rapidity compared with traditional diagnostic methods (19). A study comparing the detection rate of pneumococci using culture-based methods and direct detection by qPCR showed that the detection rate of conventional culture was 41.2%, while the positive colonization rate using qPCR was 43.7%, indicating a higher overall colonization rate of pneumococci using qPCR methods compared with conventional culture methods (20). Ingalagi et al (21) detected 200 subgingival plaque samples from patients with chronic periodontitis using qPCR and cell culture simultaneously, and results showed that the positive rate of qPCR and cell culture was 91.5 and 89.5%, respectively, suggesting that the qPCR method had a higher detection rate and clinical application value in the diagnosis of Porphyromonas gingivalis compared with the traditional bacterial culture method. Rolon Marrero et al (22) developed a qPCR assay for the simultaneous detection of Helicobacter pylori and genotypic markers of clarithromycin resistance directly from stool specimens by designing primers and TaqMan probes targeting the 23S rRNA gene of Helicobacter pylori. The assay can quickly, accurately and non-invasively diagnose Helicobacter pylori, and provide information on genotype susceptibility. This markedly shortens the detection time and helps reduce the use of invasive diagnostic processes, such as endoscopy and biopsy. Although qPCR is faster, more sensitive and more specific than traditional diagnostic methods, it can only detect one pathogen in a single amplification reaction and is regarded as low-throughput; therefore, to meet the requirements for high-throughput detection, researchers developed multiplex qPCR (MqPCR). MqPCR can simultaneously detect multiple pathogenic infections in a single sample using various sets of primers and probes, which reduces detection time, labor and reagent costs, and sample consumption. MqPCR also has sensitivity and specificity rates comparable to those of qPCR. Bennett and Gunson (23) developed an MqPCR that could simultaneously detect adenovirus, astrovirus, rotavirus and sapovirus in stool samples; this had a reduced turnaround time and overall cost compared with qPCR. Recently, Jiang et al (24) developed an MqPCR assay capable of concurrently detecting nine respiratory pathogens with no cross-reactivity and a limit of detection (LoD) of 250–500 copies/ml (1.25–2.5 copies/reaction), which is a promising alternative for the early screening of acute respiratory tract infections; however, qPCR is the preferred method for the quantitative detection of common pathogens in general laboratories. Despite the low cost and mature nature of the technology (Table I), qPCR is prone to nucleic acid contamination, primer dimer formation, improper baseline setting and a number of other issues which can lead to false-positives. Furthermore, sample inhibitors, enzyme inactivation, insufficient enzyme concentration, a low template amount and/or an inappropriate annealing temperature may lead to false-negatives (25). In addition, qPCR is time-consuming, requires relatively complex and expensive instruments to achieve accurate (±0.5°C) and rapid (>10°C/s) thermal cycles, and requires knowledgeable operators, making this technology difficult to utilize in areas and hospitals with limited access to precision instruments (Table II) (2628).

Table I.

Summary of sample characteristics, detection limits, and costs of common molecular diagnostic techniques.

Table I.

Summary of sample characteristics, detection limits, and costs of common molecular diagnostic techniques.

MethodSample type/sSample preparationSample volume, µlLimit of detectionAnalysis timeCost(Refs.)
Quantitative PCRBlood, urine, feces, secretions and other body fluidsNucleic acid extraction and purification200–300100–500 copies/ml2 hLow (<15$ per sample)(24,26)
Digital PCRBlood, urine, feces, secretions, tissue samples and paraffin-embedded samplesNucleic acid extraction, purification and microtitration200–300100–500 copies/ml2 hHigh (>$70 per sample)(42,43)
High-resolution meltingBlood, urine, stool, secretions and biopsy specimensNucleic acid extraction and purification200–30010–20 ng/µl1 hLow (<15$ per sample)(5053)
Loop-mediated isothermal amplificationBlood, urine, feces, secretions and other body fluidsTreatment with weak alkali or heat lysis (without extraction and purification)200–300 101−102 copies/µl15–60 minLow (<15$ per sample)(5860,63)
Recombinase polymerase amplificationBlood, urine, feces, secretions, plant material, culture media, etc.Treatment with weak alkali or heat lysis (without extraction and purification)200–300 101−102 copies/µl5–30 minLow (<15$ per sample)(70,71)
Nucleic acid sequence-based amplificationBlood, urine, feces, secretions and foods of animal originRNA extraction200–300102 copies/ml1.5–2 hMedium ($15–$70 per sample)(74,75,77)
Solid-phase chipBlood, urine, feces, secretions, tissue samples, etc.Nucleic acid extraction and purification, PCR amplification and fluorescent labeling200–300103 copies/ml4–6 hMedium ($15–$70 per sample)(82,87,88)
Liquid-phase chipBlood, urine, feces, secretions, tissue samples, etc.Nucleic acid extraction and purification, PCR amplification and bead hybridization200–3000.1 pg/ml35–60 minMedium ($15–$70 per sample)(89,91)
Next-generation sequencingBlood, urine, feces, respiratory secretions, cerebrospinal fluid, tissue samples, etc.Nucleic acid extraction and purification, end modification, addition of connectors, magnetic bead purification, PCR amplification200–30010–20 ng/µl24–48 hHigh (>$70 per sample)(99101, 105)
Third-generation sequencingBlood, urine, feces, respiratory secretions, cerebrospinal fluid, tissue samples, etc.Nucleic acid extraction, purification and construction of a genomic library200–30010–20 ng/µl10 min-6 hHigh (>$70 per sample)(107,110, 114)

Table II.

Summary of the application characteristics of common molecular diagnostic techniques.

Table II.

Summary of the application characteristics of common molecular diagnostic techniques.

MethodPrincipleApplicabilityAdvantagesLimitationsFalse negatives and false positives(Refs.)
Quantitative PCRReal-time monitoring of PCR progression was performed using fluorescence signal accumulation.Routine quantitative detection of common pathogens such as novel coronavirus, HBV, human papillomavirus and others in the laboratory.Good specificity, high sensitivity, high degree of automation, low costNumerous interference factors, time-consuming, instruments are expensiveFalse-positives: Nucleic acid contamination, non-specific amplification. False-negatives: Inhibitors, enzyme inactivation, too little template(17,25, 27,28)
Digital PCRAmplification reactions were performed for individual nucleic acid molecules in a separate space.Absolute quantification of low-content pathogens such as HBV, HIV and MTB, etc.Absolute quantification, low sample requirement, high tolerabilityHigh cost, limited throughput, complex operationFalse-positive: Nucleic acid contamination(29,34, 41,44)
High-resolution meltingThe different melting temperatures of mononucleotides lead to different melting curves.Genotyping of pathogens such as Escherichia coli, Staphylococcus aureus, adenoviruses, etc.Rapid, high throughput, short time, low costHigh requirement for uniformity of temperature and primer designFalse-positives: Non-specific amplification(4650, 52,53)
Loop-mediated isothermal amplificationIsothermal amplification was performed using four specific primers in the presence of Bacillus stearothermophillus DNA polymerase.Primary field screening of pathogens such as MTB, Plasmodium and Leishmaniasis in low-resource areasLow instrument requirements, fast reaction speed, low cost, high sample toleranceComplex primer design, non-specific amplification, low throughputFalse-positive: Cross-contamination(57,58, 63)
Recombinase polymerase amplificationA recombinase-primer complex is formed when a recombinase and a primer combine to initiate DNA synthesis.Rapid on-site detection of pathogens such as novel coronavirus, adenovirus, MTB, etc.Simple equipment, short assay time, high sample toleranceNo specialized primer design software, non-specific amplification, poor quantitative separation rateFalse-positive: Cross-contamination(6468, 71,72)
Nucleic acid sequence-based amplificationRNA was cycled and amplified by T7 RNA polymerase, RNase H and avian myeloblast virus reverse transcriptase.Rapid detection of RNA viruses such as influenza virus, HBV and HIV should be carried out in primary hospitals.High selectivity for RNA molecules, wide range of detection samplesHigher cost, complex reaction components, ineffective for detecting DNA pathogensFalse-positive: Non-specific amplification(73,77, 78)
Solid-phase chipNucleic acid hybridization combined with fluorescence detectionLarge-scale screening is required to determine the pathogen composition of mixed infections.High throughput, high efficiency, fast integrationHigh cost, low sensitivityFalse-negative: Highly variable pathogens.(80,85, 87,88)
Liquid-phase chipNucleic acid hybridization combined with fluorescence detection and flow cytometryLarge-scale screening for influenza virus, respiratory syncytial virus and novel coronavirus was carried out at entry and exit ports.High throughput, high sensitivity, fast reaction and small amount of sample Cross-reactivityPositive results: Cross-reactions(8991)
Next-generation sequencingSequencing while synthesizing; fluorescence signalDetection of emerging and rare pathogens such as novel coronavirus, Epstein-Barr virus, Chlamydia psittaci, etc.Sequence analysis of unknown mutations or nucleic acid fragmentsShort sequence read length, high cost, long sequencing run time and complicated processFalse-positive: Background nucleic acid and exogenous nucleic acid contamination. False-negative: Low pathogen concentration, nucleic acid degradation,(96,99, 102, 105)
Third-generation sequencingSingle-molecule fluorescence sequencing; nanopore sequencing single-molecule sequencing based on electrical signalsReal-time field analysis and epidemic surveillance of 2019 novel coronaviruses, Ebola virus, adenoviruses and other virusesLong read length, real-time sequence information, fast running speed and portable sequencing deviceLower throughput, higher error rate and higher costFalse-positives: Interference of background nucleic acid, contamination by exogenous nucleic acid and mixing of colonized bacteria(105, 106, 114)

[i] HIV, human immunodeficiency virus; HBV, Hepatitis B virus; MTB, Mycobacterium tuberculosis.

dPCR

dPCR performs absolute quantification of target genes in samples by dividing the amplification reaction into thousands of independent sections using microplates, capillaries, oil emulsions or microarrays, amplifying each target gene in separate compartments, distinguishing the generated droplets as negative or positive based on the setting of the fluorescence threshold, and calculating the target gene content through the ratio of negative and positive droplets (Fig. 2) (29). This partitioned amplification reduces template competition, increases the sensitivity of the reaction and allows dPCR to detect low levels of pathogens, minor mutations and rare allele targets (3033). Therefore, it is particularly suitable for quantifying viruses with sequence diversity and samples with low microorganism content (34), such as BK polyomavirus, human rhinovirus (HRV) and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). Studies have shown that dPCR can accurately monitor HRV serum viral load with sequence diversity (35) and latent HIV reservoirs (36), and accurately quantify small amounts of human papillomavirus (HPV) in the blood circulation (37) and Mycobacterium tuberculosis (MTB) in whole blood samples from infants not exhibiting early respiratory symptoms (38). In addition, dPCR can accurately quantify minor mutations in DNA; for example, it can quantify the frequency of drug resistance gene mutations in influenza viruses and identify mutations in the hepatitis C virus core protein gene. The method is able to detect <0.1% of rare variants in the wild-type viral background, which is difficult to achieve through the use of other molecular diagnostic techniques (39). Compared with qPCR, the main advantage of dPCR is that it achieves absolute quantification without relying on a standard curve. As a result, dPCR is particularly well suited for quantitative monitoring of low pathogen content during disease incubation or following the administration of medication (Table II). However, the accurate quantification of dPCR relies on the correct threshold setting to distinguish between positive and negative droplets, while the discrimination itself is influenced by a number of factors, such as the quality and quantity of the sample, the melting temperature, and primer and probe length (40). In addition, the instruments and reagents of dPCR technology are expensive, resulting in high detection costs, while the exposed nature of the droplet preparation system leads to an increased risk of contamination and makes it easy to cause false-positives (41) (Table I) (4244).

HRM

HRM is a novel molecular diagnostic technique developed by Gundry et al (45), based on the principle that different double-stranded DNA molecules have different melting temperatures. The technique uses fluorescent dyes or probes to monitor changes in the shape of the melting curve to rapidly and accurately detect and identify various pathogens (Fig. 3) (46). With the advantages of rapidity, and high sensitivity and specificity, HRM is often used for species identification, genotyping and drug resistance gene detection of known pathogens (47). Wen et al (48) established a multichannel real-time fluorescence PCR melting curve analysis, which showed high sensitivity and specificity in the detection of a number of clinically invasive fungi. This method can accurately and rapidly identify Candida spp., Cryptococcus spp. and Aspergillus spp., and further genotype Candida spp. to facilitate early clinical diagnosis and precise treatment. Banowary et al (49) optimized MqPCR and HRM curve analysis to simultaneously detect and distinguish jejunum bacterium from Escherichia coli, with a sensitivity and specificity of 100 and 92%, respectively, and the results showed that this technique could accurately and rapidly differentiate the genotype Campylobacter jejuni from Escherichia coli. In another study, Tong et al (50) developed and evaluated an qPCR HRM diagnostic assay to detect the H275Y mutation, which is responsible for oseltamivir resistance in the H1N1 influenza virus, with a total run time of 62 min. In conclusion, HRM is a rapid, high-throughput and low-cost method for species identification and genotyping. Compared with TaqMan probe-based genotyping and traditional mutation analysis, HRM is simple and does not require the use of probes, so the detection time and cost are lower and the success rate is higher (Table I) (51). HRM is suitable for mutation detection and large-scale analysis of single nucleotide polymorphisms, and its high specificity and sensitivity have been demonstrated in practical applications spanning basic research to clinical diagnosis. In addition, following PCR amplification, the samples are directly subjected to HRM analysis, which completes the closed tube operation and reduces the risk of contamination (Table II) (52). However, HRM has high requirements for the uniformity of instrument temperature and accuracy of primer design, and poor primer design may lead to false-positives (53).

Isothermal amplification

Isothermal amplification is a simple nucleic acid amplification technique performed at constant temperature, which does not require a thermal cycler and is therefore simple in terms of temperature control (54). The amplified products can often be monitored by turbidity, color change, lateral flow test strips and fluorescence curves, making it suitable for resource-poor areas and primary healthcare units. To date, loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP), recombinase polymerase amplification (RPA) and nucleic acid sequence-based amplification (NASBA) have been used for rapid field detection of infectious disease pathogens (55). However, the target product of the isothermal amplification reaction is short and susceptible to contamination by exogenous genetic material, which can result in false-positives. In addition, isothermal amplification primer design is complex, and to date, there is no dedicated primer design software, which may limit the widespread use of isothermal amplification for the diagnosis of clinical pathogens to some extent (56).

LAMP

Invented in 2000 by Notomi et al (57), LAMP is an isothermal nucleic acid amplification technique performed at 60–65°C; its reaction mixture includes Bacillus stearothermophilus DNA polymerase, dNTPs, two outer and two inner primers, and reaction buffer containing magnesium ions. LAMP exponentially amplifies DNA by recognizing six or eight specific sequences on target DNA with three or four pairs of primers in the presence of DNA polymerase with a high strand displacement activity (Fig. 4), amplifying DNA up to 109−1010 times within 15–60 min (58), and is particularly suitable for rapid on-site diagnosis of infectious diseases. To date, with the continuous development of isothermal technology, a variety of novel LAMP technologies have been derived from basic LAMP. These novel LAMP technologies are quicker, more specific and more sensitive than basic LAMP, as well as being better suited for the rapid detection and diagnosis of infectious disease pathogens in resource-poor areas and less well-established facilities (Table II). Vo et al (59) developed a colorimetric LAMP that can detect HPV DNA in oral rinse samples and can easily distinguish between two high-risk HPV subtypes, HPV-16 and HPV-18, enabling the rapid detection of HPV subtypes in primary hospitals. Chen et al (60) produced a novel reverse-transcription LAMP assay for the rapid detection of major pathogens in upper respiratory tract infections based on real-time monitoring with SYBR Green I. Experimental results showed that the LoD of this method was 102 copies/ml RNA, which is similar to that of qPCR. No cross-reactivity was observed in the 10 studied viruses, making it suitable for the rapid diagnosis of upper respiratory tract infections in primary hospitals and laboratories. In another study, Kim et al (61) designed two sets of specific primers and probes to develop a multiplex LAMP assay for the differential detection of MTB and non-tuberculous mycobacteria (NTM), with an analytical sensitivity of 100% for MTB and 98.4% (121/123) for NTM, and 100% for detection specificity compared with acid-fast staining and culture methods. This multiplex LAMP assay has a higher sensitivity and specificity than traditional LAMP assays for MTB and NTM, and is expected to serve as a new tool for the rapid detection and differentiation of MTB from NTM. Previously, Phillips et al (62) combined LAMP technology with lateral flow immunoassay (LFA) and a computer or cellphone to develop a rapid, low-cost, real-time, autonomous microfluidic analysis device that can detect HIV-1 viral particles in as low as 3×105 cells/ml or 2.3×107 copies/ml HIV in whole blood. This integrated device enables the early detection of HIV viral load from the whole blood of HIV-infected patients in clinical laboratories within primary care facilities. These novel LAMP technologies combine thermostatic amplification with visual detection, eliminating the need for amplifiers and detectors and further reducing the detection costs (Table I). However, complex primers and high false-positive rates may limit their application to a certain extent.

RPA

RPA is a sensitive, specific and rapid isothermal amplification method that was first reported in 2006 (63). RPA, whose core components include DNA polymerases and DNA-binding proteins and recombinases, expands target DNA from as low as 1–10 copies copies of target DNA in a single reaction to detectable levels within 30 min at 37–42°C (Fig. 5). This method is advantageous since it does not require amplification apparatus, has a short detection time and high sample tolerance, and has been successfully combined with different assays for rapid field detection of infectious disease pathogens. The most commonly used endpoint detection method for RPA is LFA (6467). Qi et al (68) successfully established a universal typing method for the detection of human adenovirus by combining RPA technology with lateral flow test strips, which allows for detection within 25 min using only basic constant temperature equipment. This method has good detection performance and is suitable for the rapid detection of human adenovirus in resource-limited areas. Mayran et al (69) combined rapid DNA extraction with isothermal RPA and monitored the results by LFA, developing a new RPA-LFA screening method to detect Hepatitis B virus (HBV) DNA in pregnant women with hypervolemia. Achieving a sensitivity and specificity of 98.6 and 88.2%, respectively, this new RPA-LFA method allowed for the rapid detection of HBV. To further optimize and improve the throughput of RPA-LFA, Li et al (70) developed a seven-fold assay using different markers, which further reduced detection time and cost, making it suitable for the rapid field detection of infectious diseases (Table I) (71). To promote the application of RPA for in-field detection of infectious diseases, it is necessary to develop sample preparation methods and portable or fully automatic RPA diagnostic equipment that are also suitable for field detection in areas with poor medical infrastructure (Table II) (72).

NASBA

NASBA is an efficient, isothermal amplification method developed by Compton in 1991 (73). The amplification reaction was performed at 41°C, and the 100- to 250-bp nucleic acid target sequence was amplified ~1012 times within 90 min (74). The NASBA reaction mixture involves three enzymes, T7 RNA polymerase, RNase H and avian myeloblast virus reverse transcriptase, which selectively and rapidly amplify RNA in the presence of background DNA, with good sensitivity, making NASBA most suited for the analysis of RNA samples (Fig. 6). During the COVID-19 pandemic, Kia et al (75) developed a reverse transcription-NASBA (RT-NASBA) assay for detecting severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) RNA using molecular beacon probes based on nucleocapsid and RNA-dependent RNA polymerase genes, with an LoD of 200 copies/ml (Table I). Compared with the Sansure RT-qPCR US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved kit (Sansure Biotech, Inc.), its clinical sensitivity was 97.64%, which renders it a simpler and faster detection method for SARS-CoV-2. Yrad et al (76) developed an NASBA-based LFA device that can detect dengue virus RNA at concentrations of as low as 0.01 µM within 20 min, with an LoD of 1.2×104 PFU/ml in the sera of patients with a dengue virus infection. This method has broad applications and will be especially useful for dengue virus detection in resource-limited areas. However, it should be noted that the NASBA amplification efficiency is low when the nucleotide sequence is >250 or <120 bp (Table II) (77). In addition, due to the low temperature requirements of the NASBA reaction, it is easy for primer dimerization and non-specific amplification to occur, which markedly increases the false-positive rate (78).

Gene chip technology

Gene chip technology mainly includes traditional solid- and liquid-phase chips; it is based on the principle of nucleic acid molecular hybridization. Gene sequences in samples are detected by hybridization between target sequences and probes fixed on different materials. Multiple pathogens can be simultaneously detected and identified, and clinicians can be quickly provided with multiple pathogen information (79). However, this technology requires a large amount of known pathogen genetic information as a basis and can only be used for the intentional screening of known pathogen genomes; it cannot detect novel pathogens.

Solid-phase chip

Solid-phase microarrays use specific probes attached to solid supports to detect labeled target molecules in solution, and can detect and analyze a large number of pathogens simultaneously, which effectively shortens detection time (Fig. 7A). It is a high-throughput molecular diagnostic tool suitable for the detection of multiple infectious disease pathogens and drug resistance gene analysis (80). Nasrabadi et al (81) developed 16S and 23S rDNA-based probes able to simultaneously detect and identify eight food-borne bacterial pathogens. Ma et al (82) developed and evaluated a solid-phase chip for the simultaneous detection of 15 types of bacteria directly from respiratory tract specimens of patients with pneumonia, thus reducing detection time, facilitating the early administration of antimicrobial drugs and preventing bacterial resistance caused by empirical antibiotic treatment. Recent studies have shown that the CapitalBio DNA chip (CapitalBio Corporation) can detect the resistance of MTB to rifampicin and isoniazid, and the corresponding gene mutations within 6 h, which is quicker and more accurate than traditional bacterial culture and drug susceptibility tests (8385). Currently, a number of automatic detection platforms based on solid-phase chips are entering the market. For example, FilmArray (BioFire Diagnostics) is an integrated platform that combines fully automated sample preparation, nucleic acid extraction, PCR amplification and automatic detection, which can detect >100 different nucleic acid targets at a time and can identify a variety of common respiratory pathogens from a single sample within 1 h (86). This technique is often used for the qualitative detection of common pathogens such as influenza virus, adenovirus, Streptococcus pneumoniae and other common respiratory tract psathogens, as well as common pathogens such as Norovirus, Rotavirus, Salmonella, Shigella and other common intestinal infection-causing pathogens (Table II). The technology is especially useful in a clinical setting for determining the pathogen composition of mixed infections and for large-scale screening of infectious diseases (87). However, solid-phase chip technology has certain limitations. First, the use of fluorescent oligonucleotides represents a significant cost (Table I). In addition, the reference sequence information of the pathogen is usually used to design the array, so it may lead to false-negatives for highly variable pathogens (88).

Liquid-phase chip

Liquid-phase suspension chip technology couples oligonucleotide probes to fluorescent microspheres with different proportions of color configurations and classifies them according to their internal colors using laser detection and flow cytometry to achieve high-resolution automated detection (Fig. 7B) (89). Liquid-phase chip technology is commonly used in gene expression analysis, microRNA analysis, single nucleotide polymorphism analysis, specific sequence analysis and microbial detection. For pathogen detection, liquid chip technology can simultaneously identify and genotype a variety of pathogens in a single complex sample, and the technology exhibits high sensitivity, high throughput and high automation (90); it is suitable for large-scale screening of infectious diseases at entry and exit ports (Table II) (91). Currently, its representative technology, xMAP® technology (Luminex Corporation), has been approved by the FDA for the multiplexed detection of pathogens such as viruses, bacteria, parasites and fungi, allowing for the rapid diagnosis of a single sample with good detection performance. One of these systems, the xTAG® Respiratory Viral Panel (Luminex Corporation), is a commercial kit for detecting multiple respiratory virus nucleic acids in human nasopharyngeal samples simultaneously. In addition to respiratory viruses, microsphere-based multiplex nucleic acid detection has been successfully used for the detection of various bacteria, viruses and parasites in human fecal samples. One of these systems, the xTAG Gastrointestinal Pathogen Panel (Luminex Corporation), is a multiplex nucleic acid detection kit designed to rapidly detect various bacterial, viral and parasitic nucleic acids in human fecal samples, with an overall sensitivity and specificity of 96.3 and 99.8%, respectively (92).

High-throughput sequencing

Gene sequencing, including first-, second- and third-generation sequencing (TGS), is the most accurate method of identifying infectious pathogens; it has been successfully used for the diagnosis of known pathogens and the identification of unknown pathogens. First generation sequencing, represented by Sanger sequencing, is mainly used for targeted sequencing to reveal the sequences of several specific low-throughput sites, which is only suitable for small-scale analysis (93). With the completion of the Human Genome Project in the early 21st century and the rapid development of sequencing technology, high-throughput and low-cost next-generation sequencing (NGS) and TGS technologies have emerged (94,95).

NGS

NGS can read billions of nucleotide sequences in a single assay, it does not rely on cell culture and it retrieves all DNA (Fig. 8A); it can also comprehensively detect microbial species and sequences (96), which makes it suitable as a complementary means of pathogen detection when no clear etiological evidence is available from routine laboratory testing (Table II). For the identification and genotyping of known pathogens, NGS is significantly more sensitive than traditional methods. Zhang et al (97) used NGS technology to diagnose bacterial meningitis in patients. By comparing bacterial culture with the Alere BinaxNow® Streptococcus pneumoniae Antigen test (Abbott Rapid Diagnostics), it was found that the sensitivity and specificity of NGS for the diagnosis of bacterial meningitis was 70.3 and 93.9%, respectively. The positive and negative predictive values were 81.4 and 91.3%, respectively, which revealed high sensitivity and specificity for the identification of Streptococcus pneumoniae. A study found that in the detection of pulmonary infectious disease pathogens, the positive rates of bacterial culture and NGS (a measure of the sensitivity of detection between culture and NGS) were 17.54 and 42.11%, respectively. In addition, 94.49% of other pathogens associated with human infectious diseases were detected by NGS in samples from patients with pulmonary infection who tested negative for traditional pathogens, suggesting that NGS could detect and identify multiple pathogens simultaneously with higher accuracy (98). According to NGS results, not only pathogen identification and typing, but also drug resistance gene detection, virulence gene detection and host immune response analysis, can be performed (94), thus guiding clinical diagnosis, disease treatment, and vaccine research and development. In addition, NGS can detect pathogens and identify rare unknown pathogens from different types of biological samples that cannot be detected by conventional assays, such as Chlamydia psittaci in bronchoalveolar lavage fluid (99), Naegleria flexneri and Brucella in cerebrospinal fluid (100), and the Chikungunya and mumps viruses in the blood (101), which allows for the timely diagnosis of rare pathogens, and promotes early and accurate treatment. NGS is suitable for the rapid identification of emerging and re-emerging pathogens, whole-genome sequencing, genomic variation and evolution, and epidemiological investigation and tracking. NGS is a powerful tool for tracking the source and chain of transmission of epidemics and for monitoring the evolution of pathogens (102); it allows comprehensive access to pathogen genome information in a short period of time, enabling researchers and healthcare providers to rapidly respond to infectious diseases. However, there are several challenges in the practical application of clinical pathogen diagnosis, such as high purity and high concentrations of nucleic acids for nucleic acid processing in the preparation stages, the need for PCR amplification, the inability to directly detect RNA, the short read length and the need to use special bioinformatics tools for complex data analysis (103). The biggest obstacle, however, is interpreting complex sequencing data for pathogen determination (104,105).

TGS

TGS, represented by the Oxford Nanopore Technologies (ONT) MinION (ONT), was launched in 2015 (106); it combines genetic engineering and computer-aided technology to determine the base sequence by detecting the changes in electrical current as DNA or RNA passes through the nanopore (Fig. 8B). The high-throughput, rapid DNA sequencing technology produces ultralong reads without the need for labeling, which simplifies the detection process and reduces costs (107). TGS has a number of advantages over NGS. NGS cannot directly detect RNA and has a short read length in the field of pathogen diagnosis. Furthermore, TGS can directly carry out RNA sequencing without a reverse transcription process, which shortens detection time. Keller et al (108) described direct RNA sequencing of five influenza A virus genomes, with 100% nucleotide coverage and 99% agreement between Nanopore and Illumina Inc.-based sequencing results by modifying the RNA sequencing method published by Oxford Nanopore Technologies, Ltd. Recently, TGS has been used for the RNA sequencing of SARS-CoV-2, where it can detect SARS-CoV-2 and other respiratory viruses simultaneously within 6–10 h (109), markedly reducing detection time compared with NGS. In addition, TGS sequencing has significantly increased read length capabilities, enabling complete gene sequencing and identifying novel full-length transcript variants and gene fusions that cannot be detected by NGS (110), thus improving the likelihood of detecting and identifying pathogenic species. At present, portable sequencing devices based on the Nanopore system have been used for real-time on-site analysis and out-of-hospital bedside detection of novel coronavirus, Ebola virus, adenovirus and a number of other viruses (111113). They are suitable for epidemic surveillance and virus mutation monitoring in resource-limited situations and also for the identification of rare and difficult-to-culture bacteria (Table II) (105). However, the high error rate of TGS is the biggest obstacle to its application in the field of microbial detection. Nonetheless, with continued optimization of nanopore structures and base-calling algorithms, and with improvements in sequence acquisition speed and base recognition accuracy, TGS is expected to become an ideal tool for the detection of known pathogens and the discovery of rare and unknown pathogens (114).

Other molecular diagnostic techniques

Biosensing technology uses a combination of target biomarkers and ionic conductive materials to generate signals, which are detected and analyzed by sensors (optical, electrochemical or piezoelectric) and reading devices (115). Currently, the use of photoelectric biosensing of nucleic acids is increasing in popularity due to its sensitivity and speed for the early diagnosis and quantitative analysis of infectious diseases. Sheng et al (116) developed a label-free biosensor with an RNA aptamer for the sensitive, rapid quantitative detection of food pathogens without the isolation, purification and enrichment processes. A further study found that optical label-free biosensors can detect and quantify MTB, mycobacterial proteins and interferons quickly and efficiently, making them beneficial for the early detection of tuberculosis (117). Fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) is a molecular diagnostic technique used to detect and localize specific nucleic acid sequences in cells. To improve throughput, FISH can be used in combination with flow cytometry to detect target nucleic acid sequences in thousands of individual cells. Flow cytometry-based FISH (flow-FISH) uses fluorescent probes that target DNA or RNA to detect specific genes or pathogens; it can also be multiplexed so that multiple gene targets or pathogens can be measured simultaneously (118). Flow-FISH has been used for bacterial identification and detecting gene expression, for monitoring viral multiplication in infected cells, and for colony analysis and counting. Recently, the use of in vivo bacterial sorting technology assisted by flow-FISH has made it easier to isolate, classify and purify live bacteria based on target genes, and to study the role of target genes in the growth, substance metabolism, bacterial virulence and antibiotic resistance of bacteria (119). Mass spectrometry analysis of the molecular mass and charge of biomarkers will improve the quality of the model compared with the reference spectra and can be used for the identification of pathogenic microorganisms at the species and genus levels; with its high accuracy and signal acquisition speed, it is expected to become a routine tool for rapid clinical analysis of multiple pathogenic microorganisms in a single sample (120,121).

Conclusion

In conclusion, molecular diagnostic technology provides an improved choice for the diagnosis of infectious diseases compared to traditional diagnostic techniques, such as microbial culture, hemagglutination inhibition tests, and ELISA. The careful selection and combination of different molecular diagnostic technologies according to a user's needs can provide a timely and accurate diagnosis of infectious disease pathogens and facilitate precision treatment, to effectively control diseases. qPCR technology is mature, low-cost and suitable for the qualitative and quantitative analysis of common pathogens in standard laboratories. dPCR can be used for the absolute quantification of target genes in samples, and is particularly suitable for the analysis of samples containing low pathogen levels, and the detection of small mutations and rare allele targets. As a fast, high-throughput and cost-effective technique, HRM is often used for mutation detection and large-scale analysis of single nucleotide polymorphisms. Isothermal PCR can be used for nucleic acid amplification at a constant temperature, which does not require a thermocycler, and is more suitable for the rapid detection of pathogens in resource-limited areas and primary medical units. Gene chip technology has the ability to detect and identify multiple pathogens simultaneously, which is particularly useful in clinical settings for the pathogenic composition determination of mixed infections. However, this technology can only screen for the genomes of known pathogens and cannot detect new, unknown pathogens, unlike gene sequencing technology, which can comprehensively detect the types and sequences of pathogens. The molecular diagnostic techniques outlined in the present review need further improvement. First, nucleic acid extraction and purification steps in molecular diagnostic techniques are cumbersome. Therefore, it is essential to streamline the existing nucleic acid extraction procedures or develop molecular techniques to avoid nucleic acid extraction. Second, most molecular diagnostic reagents require low-temperature transport and storage, which increases the cost of molecular diagnostics and hinders their application in remote or resource-limited areas, so ready-to-use, room temperature-stable reaction mixtures need to be studied to reduce costs and increase their applicability in these areas. Finally, molecular diagnostic techniques such as qPCR, dPCR and sequencing are instrument-dependent, meaning that rapid on-site detection of pathogens in resource-limited conditions can prove difficult. Continuous improvement of molecular diagnostic technology will help to create more high-throughput, automated and portable instruments with high sensitivity and specificity to aid in the rapid diagnosis and treatment of infectious diseases worldwide.

Acknowledgements

Not applicable.

Funding

This study was supported by the Natural Science Foundation of Zhejiang Province (grant. no. LGF20H200009), the Hangzhou Medical and Health Technology Planning Project (grant. no. OO20190415) and the Zhejiang Medical and Health Technology Planning Project (grant. no. 2019331539).

Availability of data and materials

Not applicable.

Authors' contributions

YZD, YJZ, QQL and XJJ developed the manuscript concept and produced the initial draft. JC and HJZ provided valuable comments on this first draft. YZD, YJZ, QQL, XJJ, JC and HJZ critically revised the manuscript for intellectual content. All authors read and approved the final version of the manuscript. Data authentication is not applicable.

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Not applicable.

Patient consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

References

1 

Zhu L, Ling J, Zhu Z, Tian T, Song Y and Yang C: Selection and applications of functional nucleic acids for infectious disease detection and prevention. Anal Bioanal Chem. 413:4563–4579. 2021. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

2 

Ling Z, Xiao H and Chen W: Gut microbiome: The cornerstone of life and health. Adv Gut Microbiome Res. 2022:1–3. 2022. View Article : Google Scholar

3 

Vengesai A, Kasambala M, Mutandadzi H, Mduluza-Jokonya TL, Mduluza T and Naicker T: Scoping review of the applications of peptide microarrays on the fight against human infections. PLoS One. 17:e02486662022. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

4 

Casanova JL and Abel L: Lethal Infectious diseases as inborn errors of immunity: Toward a synthesis of the germ and genetic theories. Annu Rev Pathol. 16:23–50. 2021. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

5 

Yang L, Jianying L and Pei-Yong S: SARS-CoV-2 variants and vaccination. Zoonoses (Burlingt). 2:62022.

6 

Micoli F, Bagnoli F, Rappuoli R and Serruto D: The role of vaccines in combatting antimicrobial resistance. Nat Rev Microbiol. 19:287–302. 2021. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

7 

Mercer A: Protection against severe infectious disease in the past. Pathog Glob Health. 115:151–167. 2021. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

8 

Liu L and Moore MD: A survey of analytical techniques for noroviruses. Foods. 9:3182020. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

9 

Xiang Z, Jiang B, Li W, Zhai G, Zhou H, Wang Y and Wu J: The diagnostic and prognostic value of serum exosome-derived carbamoyl phosphate synthase 1 in HEV-related acute liver failure patients. J Med Virol. 94:5015–5025. 2022. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

10 

Huang HS, Tsai CL, Chang J, Hsu TC, Lin S and Lee CC: Multiplex PCR system for the rapid diagnosis of respiratory virus infection: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Microbiol Infect. 24:1055–1063. 2018. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

11 

Wu J, Bortolanza M, Zhai G, Shang A, Ling Z, Jiang B, Shen X, Yao Y, Yu J, Li L and Cao H: Gut microbiota dysbiosis associated with plasma levels of Interferon-γ and viral load in patients with acute hepatitis E infection. J Med Virol. 94:692–702. 2022. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

12 

Wu J, Xu Y, Cui Y, Bortolanza M, Wang M, Jiang B, Yan M, Liang W, Yao Y, Pan Q, et al: Dynamic changes of serum metabolites associated with infection and severity of patients with acute hepatitis E infection. J Med Virol. 94:2714–2726. 2022. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

13 

Zhang B, Zhou J, Li M, Wei Y, Wang J, Wang Y, Shi P, Li X, Huang Z, Tang H and Song Z: Evaluation of CRISPR/Cas9 site-specific function and validation of sgRNA sequence by a Cas9/sgRNA-assisted reverse PCR technique. Anal Bioanal Chem. 413:2447–2456. 2021. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

14 

Sidstedt M, Rådström P and Hedman J: PCR inhibition in qPCR, dPCR and MPS-mechanisms and solutions. Anal Bioanal Chem. 412:2009–2023. 2020. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

15 

García-Bernalt Diego J, Fernández-Soto P, Crego-Vicente B, Alonso-Castrillejo S, Febrer-Sendra B, Gómez-Sánchez A, Vicente B, López-Abán J and Muro A: Progress in loop-mediated isothermal amplification assay for detection of Schistosoma mansoni DNA: Towards a ready-to-use test. Sci Rep. 9:147442019. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

16 

Jiang W, Ji W, Zhang Y, Xie Y, Chen S, Jin Y and Duan G: An update on detection technologies for SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern. Viruses. 14:23242022. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

17 

Lv C, Deng W, Wang L, Qin Z, Zhou X and Xu J: Molecular techniques as alternatives of diagnostic tools in china as schistosomiasis moving towards elimination. Pathogens. 11:2872022. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

18 

Mackay IM, Arden KE and Nitsche A: Real-time PCR in virology. Nucleic Acids Re. 30:1292–1305. 2002. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

19 

Castelli G, Bruno F, Reale S, Catanzaro S, Valenza V and Vitale F: Molecular diagnosis of leishmaniasis: Quantification of parasite load by a Real-Time PCR assay with high sensitivity. Pathogens. 10:8652021. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

20 

Vidanapathirana G, Angulmaduwa ALSK, Munasinghe TS, Ekanayake EWMA, Harasgama P, Kudagammana ST, Dissanayake BN and Liyanapathirana LVC: Comparison of pneumococcal colonization density among healthy children and children with respiratory symptoms using real time PCR (RT-PCR). BMC Microbiol. 22:312022. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

21 

Ingalagi P, Bhat KG, Kulkarni RD, Kotrashetti VS, Kumbar V and Kugaji M: Detection and comparison of prevalence of Porphyromonas gingivalis through culture and Real Time-polymerase chain reaction in subgingival plaque samples of chronic periodontitis and healthy individuals. J Oral Maxillofac Pathol. 26:2882022.PubMed/NCBI

22 

Marrero Rolon R, Cunningham SA, Mandrekar JN, Polo ET and Patel R: Erratum for Marrero Rolon et al., ‘Clinical evaluation of a real-time pCR assay for simultaneous detection of helicobacter pylori and genotypic markers of clarithromycin resistance directly from stool’. J Clin Microbiol. 60:e02452212022. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

23 

Bennett S and Gunson RN: The development of a multiplex real-time RT-PCR for the detection of adenovirus, astrovirus, rotavirus and sapovirus from stool samples. J Virol Methods. 242:30–34. 2017. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

24 

Jiang XW, Huang TS, Xie L, Chen SZ, Wang SD, Huang ZW, Li XY and Ling WP: Development of a diagnostic assay by three-tube multiplex real-time PCR for simultaneous detection of nine microorganisms causing acute respiratory infections. Sci Rep. 12:133062022. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

25 

Liu L, Zhang Y, Cui P, Wang C, Zeng X, Deng G and Wang X: Development of a duplex TaqMan real-time RT-PCR assay for simultaneous detection of newly emerged H5N6 influenza viruses. Virol J. 16:1192019. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

26 

Das Mukhopadhyay C, Sharma P, Sinha K and Rajarshi K: Recent trends in analytical and digital techniques for the detection of the SARS-Cov-2. Biophys Chem. 270:1065382021. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

27 

Yu CY, Chan KG, Yean CY and Ang GY: Nucleic acid-based diagnostic tests for the detection SARS-CoV-2: An Update. Diagnostics (Basel). 11:532021. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

28 

Li H, Bai R, Zhao Z, Tao L, Ma M, Ji Z, Jian M, Ding Z, Dai X, Bao F and Liu A: Application of droplet digital PCR to detect the pathogens of infectious diseases. Biosci Rep. 38:BSR201811702018. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

29 

Lei S, Chen S and Zhong Q: Digital PCR for accurate quantification of pathogens: Principles, applications, challenges and future prospects. Int J Biol Macromol. 184:750–759. 2021. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

30 

Das S, Hammond-McKibben D, Guralski D, Lobo S and Fiedler PN: Development of a sensitive molecular diagnostic assay for detecting Borrelia burgdorferi DNA from the blood of Lyme disease patients by digital PCR. PLoS One. 15:e02353722020. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

31 

Cao Y, Yu M, Dong G, Chen B and Zhang B: Digital PCR as an emerging tool for monitoring of microbial biodegradation. Molecules. 25:7062020. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

32 

Zhang L, Parvin R, Fan Q and Ye F: Emerging digital PCR technology in precision medicine. Biosens Bioelectron. 211:1143442020. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

33 

Košir AB, Spilsberg B, Holst-Jensen A, Žel J and Dobnik D: Development and inter-laboratory assessment of droplet digital PCR assays for multiplex quantification of 15 genetically modified soybean lines. Sci Rep. 9:37352019. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

34 

Xu L, Qu H, Alonso DG, Yu Z, Yu Y, Shi Y, Hu C, Zhu T, Wu N and Shen F: Portable integrated digital PCR system for the point-of-care quantification of BK virus from urine samples. Biosens Bioelectron. 175:1129082021. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

35 

Sedlak RH, Nguyen T, Palileo I, Jerome KR and Kuypers J: Superiority of Digital Reverse Transcription-PCR (RT-PCR) over Real-Time RT-PCR for Quantitation of Highly Divergent Human Rhinoviruses. J Clin Microbiol. 55:442–449. 2017. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

36 

van Snippenberg W, Gleerup D, Rutsaert S, Vandekerckhove L, De Spiegelaere W and Trypsteen W: Triplex digital PCR assays for the quantification of intact proviral HIV-1 DNA. Methods. 201:41–48. 2022. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

37 

Bønløkke S, Stougaard M, Sorensen BS, Booth BB, Høgdall E, Nyvang GB, Lindegaard JC, Blaakær J, Bertelsen J, Fuglsang K, et al: The diagnostic value of circulating Cell-Free HPV DNA in plasma from cervical cancer patients. Cells. 11:21702022. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

38 

Lyu L, Li Z, Pan L, Jia H, Sun Q, Liu Q and Zhang Z: Evaluation of digital PCR assay in detection of M. tuberculosis IS6110 and IS1081 in tuberculosis patients plasma. BMC Infect Dis. 20:6572020. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

39 

Salipante SJ and Jerome KR: Digital PCR-An emerging technology with broad applications in microbiology. Clin Chem. 66:117–123. 2020. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

40 

Rutsaert S, Bosman K, Trypsteen W, Nijhuis M and Vandekerckhove L: Digital PCR as a tool to measure HIV persistence. Retrovirology. 15:162018. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

41 

Kojabad AA, Farzanehpour M, Galeh HEG, Dorostkar R, Jafarpour A, Bolandian M and Nodooshan MM: Droplet digital PCR of viral DNA/RNA, current progress, challenges, and future perspectives. J Med Virol. 93:4182–4197. 2021. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

42 

Dingle TC, Sedlak RH, Cook L and Jerome KR: Tolerance of droplet-digital PCR vs real-time quantitative PCR to inhibitory substances. Clin Chem. 59:1670–1672. 2013. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

43 

Pan SW, Su WJ, Chan YJ, Chuang FY, Feng JY and Chen YM: Mycobacterium tuberculosis-derived circulating cell-free DNA in patients with pulmonary tuberculosis and persons with latent tuberculosis infection. PLoS One. 16:e02538792021. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

44 

Wang D, Liu E, Liu H, Jin X, Niu C, Gao Y and Su X: A droplet digital PCR assay for detection and quantification of Verticillium nonalfalfae and V. albo-atrum. Front Cell Infect Microbiol. 12:11106842023. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

45 

Gundry CN, Vandersteen JG, Reed GH, Pryor RJ, Chen J and Wittwer CT: Amplicon melting analysis with labeled primers: A closed-tube method for differentiating homozygotes and heterozygotes. Clin Chem. 49:396–406. 2003. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

46 

Tamburro M and Ripabelli G: High Resolution Melting as a rapid, reliable, accurate and cost-effective emerging tool for genotyping pathogenic bacteria and enhancing molecular epidemiological surveillance: A comprehensive review of the literature. Ann Ig. 29:293–316. 2017.PubMed/NCBI

47 

Hu M, Yang D, Wu X, Luo M and Xu F: A novel high-resolution melting analysis-based method for Salmonella genotyping. J Microbiol Methods. 172:1058062020. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

48 

Wen X, Chen Q, Yin H, Wu S and Wang X: Rapid identification of clinical common invasive fungi via a multi-channel real-time fluorescent polymerase chain reaction melting curve analysis. Medicine (Baltimore). 99:e191942020. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

49 

Banowary B, Dang VT, Sarker S, Connolly JH, Chenu J, Groves P, Ayton M, Raidal S, Devi A, Vanniasinkam T and Ghorashi SA: Differentiation of Campylobacter jejuni and campylobacter coli using Multiplex-PCR and high resolution melt curve analysis. PLoS One. 10:e01388082015. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

50 

Tong SY, Dakh F, Hurt AC, Deng YM, Freeman K, Fagan PK, Barr IG and Giffard PM: Rapid detection of the H275Y oseltamivir resistance mutation in influenza A/H1N1 2009 by single base pair RT-PCR and high-resolution melting. PLoS One. 6:e214462020. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

51 

Kafi H, Emaneini M, Halimi S, Rahdar HA, Jabalameli F and Beigverdi R: Multiplex high-resolution melting assay for simultaneous detection of five key bacterial pathogens in urinary tract infections: A pilot study. Front Microbiol. 13:10491782022. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

52 

Tong SY and Giffard PM: Microbiological applications of high-resolution melting analysis. J Clin Microbiol. 50:3418–3421. 2012. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

53 

Ghorbani J, Hashemi FB, Jabalameli F, Emaneini M and Beigverdi R: Multiplex detection of five common respiratory pathogens from bronchoalveolar lavages using high resolution melting curve analysis. BMC Microbiol. 22:1412020. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

54 

Zamani M, Furst AL and Klapperich CM: Strategies for engineering affordable technologies for point-of-Care diagnostics of infectious diseases. Acc Chem Res. 54:3772–3779. 2021. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

55 

Du J, Ma B, Li J, Wang Y, Dou T, Xu S and Zhang M: Rapid detection and differentiation of legionella pneumophila and Non-legionella pneumophila Species by using recombinase polymerase amplification combined with EuNPs-based lateral flow immunochromatography. Front Chem. 9:8151892022. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

56 

Soroka M, Wasowicz B and Rymaszewska A: Loop-Mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP): The better sibling of PCR? Cells. 10:19312021. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

57 

Notomi T, Okayama H, Masubuchi H, Yonekawa T, Watanabe K, Amino N and Hase T: Loop-mediated isothermal amplification of DNA. Nucleic Acids Res. 28:E632000. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

58 

Parija SC and Poddar A: Molecular diagnosis of infectious parasites in the post-COVID-19 era. Trop Parasitol. 11:3–10. 2021. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

59 

Vo DT and Story MD: Facile and direct detection of human papillomavirus (HPV) DNA in cells using loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP). Mol Cell Probes. 59:1017602021. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

60 

Chen N, Si Y, Li G, Zong M, Zhang W, Ye Y and Fan L: Development of a loop-mediated isothermal amplification assay for the rapid detection of six common respiratory viruses. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 40:2525–2532. 2021. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

61 

Kim J, Park BG, Lim DH, Jang WS, Nam J, Mihn DC and Lim CS: Development and evaluation of a multiplex loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP) assay for differentiation of Mycobacterium tuberculosis and non-tuberculosis mycobacterium in clinical samples. PLoS One. 16:e02447532021. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

62 

Phillips EA, Moehling TJ, Ejendal KFK, Hoilett OS, Byers KM, Basing LA, Jankowski LA, Bennett JB, Lin LK, Stanciu LA and Linnes JC: Microfluidic rapid and autonomous analytical device (microRAAD) to detect HIV from whole blood samples. Lab Chip. 19:3375–3386. 2019. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

63 

Chen X, Zhang J, Pan M, Qin Y, Zhao H, Qin P, Yang Q, Li X, Zeng W, Xiang Z, et al: Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP) assays targeting 18S ribosomal RNA genes for identifying P. vivax and P. ovale species and mitochondrial DNA for detecting the genus Plasmodium. Parasit Vectors. 14:2782021. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

64 

Trinh KTL and Lee NY: Fabrication of wearable PDMS device for rapid detection of nucleic acids via recombinase polymerase amplification operated by human body heat. Biosensors (Basel). 12:722022. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

65 

Islam MN, Moriam S, Umer M, Phan HP, Salomon C, Kline R, Nguyen NT and Shiddiky MJA: Naked-eye and electrochemical detection of isothermally amplified HOTAIR long non-coding RNA. Analyst. 143:3021–3028. 2018. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

66 

Mota DS, Guimarães JM, Gandarilla AMD, Filho JCBS, Brito WR and Mariúba LAM: Recombinase polymerase amplification in the molecular diagnosis of microbiological targets and its applications. Can J Microbiol. 68:383–402. 2022. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

67 

Li J, Macdonald J and von Stetten F: Review: A comprehensive summary of a decade development of the recombinase polymerase amplification. Analyst. 145:1950–1960. 2020. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

68 

Qi Y, Li W, Li X, Shen W, Zhang J, Li J, Lv R, Lu N, Zong L, Zhuang S, et al: Development of rapid and visual nucleic acid detection methods towards four serotypes of human adenovirus species B based on RPA-LF test. Biomed Res Int. 2021:99577472021. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

69 

Mayran C, Foulongne V, Van de Perre P, Fournier-Wirth C, Molès JP and Cantaloube JF: Rapid diagnostic test for hepatitis B virus viral load based on recombinase polymerase amplification combined with a lateral flow read-out. Diagnostics (Basel). 12:6212022. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

70 

Li J, Pollak NM and Macdonald J: Multiplex detection of nucleic acids using recombinase polymerase amplification and a molecular colorimetric 7-Segment display. ACS Omega. 4:11388–11396. 2019. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

71 

Munawar MA: Critical insight into recombinase polymerase amplification technology. Expert Rev Mol Diagn. 22:725–737. 2022. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

72 

Xu L, Duan J, Chen J, Ding S and Cheng W: Recent advances in rolling circle amplification-based biosensing strategies-A review. Anal Chim Acta. 1148:2381872021. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

73 

Compton J: Nucleic acid sequence-based amplification. Nature. 350:91–92. 1991. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

74 

Glökler J, Lim TS, Ida J and Frohme M: Isothermal amplifications-a comprehensive review on current methods. Crit Rev Biochem Mol Biol. 56:543–586. 2021. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

75 

Kia V, Tafti A, Paryan M and Mohammadi-Yeganeh S: Evaluation of real-time NASBA assay for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 compared with real-time PCR. Ir J Med Sci. 6:1–7. 2022.

76 

Yrad FM, Castañares JM and Alocilja EC: Visual detection of Dengue-1 RNA using gold nanoparticle-based lateral flow biosensor. Diagnostics (Basel). 9:742019. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

77 

Mohammadi-Yeganeh S, Paryan M, Mirab Samiee S, Kia V and Rezvan H: Molecular beacon probes-base multiplex NASBA Real-time for detection of HIV-1 and HCV. Iran J Microbiol. 4:47–54. 2012.PubMed/NCBI

78 

Gao YP, Huang KJ, Wang FT, Hou YY, Xu J and Li G: Recent advances in biological detection with rolling circle amplification: Design strategy, biosensing mechanism, and practical applications. Analyst. 147:3396–3414. 2022. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

79 

Wöhrle J, Krämer SD, Meyer PA, Rath C, Hügle M, Urban GA and Roth G: Digital DNA microarray generation on glass substrates. Sci Rep. 10:57702020. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

80 

Xie C, Hu X, Liu Y and Shu C: Performance comparison of GeneXpert MTB/RIF, gene chip technology, and modified roche culture method in detecting mycobacterium tuberculosis and drug susceptibility in sputum. Contrast Media Mol Imaging. 2022:29954642022. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

81 

Nasrabadi Z, Ranjbar R, Poorali F and Sarshar M: Detection of eight foodborne bacterial pathogens by oligonucleotide array hybridization. Electron Physician. 9:4405–4411. 2017. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

82 

Ma X, Li Y, Liang Y, Liu Y, Yu L, Li C, Liu Q and Chen L: Development of a DNA microarray assay for rapid detection of fifteen bacterial pathogens in pneumonia. BMC Microbiol. 20:1772020. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

83 

Feng G, Han W, Shi J, Xia R and Xu J: Analysis of the application of a gene chip method for detecting Mycobacterium tuberculosis drug resistance in clinical specimens: A retrospective study. Sci Rep. 11:179512021. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

84 

Zhu L, Liu Q, Martinez L, Shi J, Chen C, Shao Y, Zhong C, Song H, Li G, Ding X, et al: Diagnostic value of GeneChip for detection of resistant Mycobacterium tuberculosis in patients with differing treatment histories. J Clin Microbiol. 53:131–135. 2015. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

85 

Sun B and Sun Y: Diagnostic performance of DNA microarray for detecting rifampicin and isoniazid resistance in Mycobacterium tuberculosis. J Thorac Dis. 13:4448–4454. 2021. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

86 

Chandran S, Arjun R, Sasidharan A, Niyas VK and Chandran S: Clinical performance of FilmArray Meningitis/Encephalitis multiplex polymerase chain reaction panel in central nervous system infections. Indian J Crit Care Med. 26:67–70. 2022. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

87 

Senescau A, Kempowsky T, Bernard E, Messier S, Besse P, Fabre R and François JM: Innovative DendrisChips® Technology for a syndromic approach of in vitro diagnosis: Application to the respiratory infectious diseases. Diagnostics (Basel). 8:772018. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

88 

Dien Bard J and McElvania E: Panels and syndromic testing in clinical microbiology. Clin Lab Med. 40:393–420. 2020. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

89 

Gonsalves S, Mahony J, Rao A, Dunbar S and Juretschko S: Multiplexed detection and identification of respiratory pathogens using the NxTAG® respiratory pathogen panel. Methods. 158:61–68. 2019. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

90 

Ma ZY, Deng H, Hua LD, Lei W, Zhang CB, Dai QQ, Tao WJ and Zhang L: Suspension microarray-based comparison of oropharyngeal swab and bronchoalveolar lavage fluid for pathogen identification in young children hospitalized with respiratory tract infection. BMC Infect Dis. 20:1682020. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

91 

Dunbar SA: Applications of Luminex xMAP technology for rapid, high-throughput multiplexed nucleic acid detection. Clin Chim Acta. 363:71–82. 2006. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

92 

Reslova N, Michna V, Kasny M, Mikel P and Kralik P: xMAP technology: Applications in detection of pathogens. Front Microbiol. 8:552017. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

93 

Dai Z, Li T, Li J, Han Z, Pan Y, Tang S, Diao X and Luo M: High-throughput long paired-end sequencing of a Fosmid library by PacBio. Plant Methods. 15:1422019. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

94 

Duan H, Li X, Mei A, Li P, Liu Y, Li X, Li W, Wang C and Xie S: The diagnostic value of metagenomic next-generation sequencing in infectious diseases. BMC Infect Dis. 21:622021. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

95 

Grumaz S, Stevens P, Grumaz C, Decker SO, Weigand MA, Hofer S, Brenner T, von Haeseler A and Sohn K: Next-generation sequencing diagnostics of bacteremia in septic patients. Genome Med. 8:732016. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

96 

Lyimo BM, Popkin-Hall ZR, Giesbrecht DJ, Mandara CI, Madebe RA, Bakari C, Pereus D, Seth MD, Ngamba RM, Mbwambo RB, et al: Potential opportunities and challenges of deploying next generation sequencing and CRISPR-Cas systems to support diagnostics and surveillance towards malaria control and elimination in africa. Front Cell Infect Microbiol. 12:7578442022. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

97 

Zhang XX, Guo LY, Liu LL, Shen A, Feng WY, Huang WH, Hu HL, Hu B, Guo X, Chen TM, et al: The diagnostic value of metagenomic next-generation sequencing for identifying Streptococcus pneumoniae in paediatric bacterial meningitis. BMC Infect Dis. 19:4952019. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

98 

Huang J, Jiang E, Yang D, Wei J, Zhao M, Feng J and Cao J: Metagenomic Next-generation sequencing versus traditional pathogen detection in the diagnosis of peripheral pulmonary infectious lesions. Infect Drug Resist. 13:567–576. 2020. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

99 

Dong Y, Gao Y, Chai Y and Shou S: Use of quantitative metagenomics next-generation sequencing to confirm fever of unknown origin and infectious disease. Front Microbio. 13:9310582022. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

100 

Gu L, Liu W, Ru M, Lin J, Yu G, Ye J, Zhu ZA, Liu Y, Chen J, Lai G and Wen W: The application of metagenomic next-generation sequencing in diagnosing Chlamydia psittaci pneumonia: A report of five cases. BMC Pulm Med. 20:652020. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

101 

Jerome H, Taylor C, Sreenu VB, Klymenko T, Filipe ADS, Jackson C, Davis C, Ashraf S, Wilson-Davies E, Jesudason N, et al: Metagenomic next-generation sequencing aids the diagnosis of viral infections in febrile returning travellers. J Infect. 79:383–388. 2019. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

102 

Simner PJ, Miller S and Carroll KC: Understanding the promises and hurdles of metagenomic next-generation sequencing as a diagnostic tool for infectious diseases. Clin Infect Dis. 66:778–788. 2018. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

103 

Yu X, Jiang W, Shi Y, Ye H and Lin J: Applications of sequencing technology in clinical microbial infection. J Cell Mol Med. 23:7143–7150. 2019. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

104 

Gu W, Miller S and Chiu CY: Clinical metagenomic next-generation sequencing for pathogen detection. Annu Rev Patho. 14:319–338. 2019. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

105 

Zhang L, Chen F, Zeng Z, Xu M, Sun F, Yang L, Bi X, Lin Y, Gao Y, Hao H, et al: Advances in metagenomics and its application in environmental microorganisms. Front Microbiol. 12:7663642021. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

106 

Wang X, Liu Y, Liu H, Pan W, Ren J, Zheng X, Tan Y, Chen Z, Deng Y, He N, et al: Recent advances and application of whole genome amplification in molecular diagnosis and medicine. Med Comm. 3:e1162022.

107 

Athanasopoulou K, Boti MA, Adamopoulos PG, Skourou PC and Scorilas A: Third-Generation sequencing: The spearhead towards the radical transformation of modern genomics. Life (Basel). 12:302021.PubMed/NCBI

108 

Keller MW, Rambo-Martin BL, Wilson MM, Ridenour CA, Shepard SS, Stark TJ, Neuhaus EB, Dugan VG, Wentworth DE and Barnes JR: Author Correction: Direct RNA Sequencing of the coding complete influenza A virus genome. Sci Rep. 8:157462018. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

109 

Wang M, Fu A, Hu B, Tong Y, Liu R, Liu Z, Gu J, Xiang B, Liu J, Jiang W, et al: Nanopore targeted sequencing for the accurate and comprehensive detection of SARS-CoV-2 and other respiratory viruses. Small. 16:e20021692020. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

110 

Mongan AE, Tuda JSB and Runtuwene LR: Portable sequencer in the fight against infectious disease. J Hum Genet. 65:35–40. 2020. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

111 

Holshue ML, DeBolt C, Lindquist S, Lofy KH, Wiesman J, Bruce H, Spitters C, Ericson K, Wilkerson S, Tural A, et al: First case of 2019 novel coronavirus in the united states. N Engl J Med. 382:929–936. 2020. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

112 

Wongsurawat T, Jenjaroenpun P, Taylor MK, Lee J, Tolardo AL, Parvathareddy J, Kandel S, Wadley TD, Kaewnapan B, Athipanyasilp N, et al: Rapid Sequencing of Multiple RNA Viruses in Their Native Form. Front Microbiol. 10:2602019. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

113 

Fang Y, Changavi A, Yang M, Sun L, Zhang A, Sun D, Sun Z, Zhang B and Xu MQ: Nanopore Whole Transcriptome Analysis and Pathogen Surveillance by a Novel Solid-Phase Catalysis Approach. Adv Sci (Weinh). 9:e21033732022. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

114 

Akaçin İ, Ersoy Ş, Doluca O and Güngörmüşler M: Comparing the significance of the utilization of next generation and third generation sequencing technologies in microbial metagenomics. Microbiol Res. 264:1271542022. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

115 

Gradisteanu Pircalabioru G, Iliescu FS, Mihaescu G, Cucu AI, Ionescu ON, Popescu M, Simion M, Burlibasa L, Tica M, Chifiriuc MC and Iliescu C: Advances in the rapid diagnostic of viral respiratory tract infections. Front Cell Infect Microbiol. 12:8072532022. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

116 

Sheng L, Lu Y, Deng S, Liao X, Zhang K, Ding T, Gao H, Liu D, Deng R and Li J: A transcription aptasensor: Amplified, label-free and culture-independent detection of foodborne pathogens via light-up RNA aptamers. Chem Commun (Camb). 55:10096–10099. 2019. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

117 

Andryukov BG, Lyapun IN, Matosova EV and Somova LM: Biosensor technologies in medicine: From detection of biochemical markers to research into molecular targets (review). Sovrem Tekhnologii Med. 12:70–83. 2021. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

118 

Robertson KL and Vora GJ: Locked nucleic acid flow cytometry-fluorescence in situ hybridization (LNA flow-FISH): A method for bacterial small RNA detection. J Vis Exp. 10:e36552012.PubMed/NCBI

119 

Freen-van Heeren JJ: Flow-FISH as a tool for studying bacteria, fungi and viruses. BioTech (Basel). 10:212021. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

120 

Israr MZ, Bernieh D, Salzano A, Cassambai S, Yazaki Y and Suzuki T: Matrix-assisted laser desorption ionisation (MALDI) mass spectrometry (MS): basics and clinical applications. Clin Chem Lab Med. 58:883–896. 2020. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

121 

Kailasa SK, Koduru JR, Park TJ, Wu HF and Lin YC: Progress of electrospray ionization and rapid evaporative ionization mass spectrometric techniques for the broad-range identification of microorganisms. Analyst. 145:70722020. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

Related Articles

Journal Cover

May-2023
Volume 27 Issue 5

Print ISSN: 1791-2997
Online ISSN:1791-3004

Sign up for eToc alerts

Recommend to Library

Copy and paste a formatted citation
x
Spandidos Publications style
Liu Q, Jin X, Cheng J, Zhou H, Zhang Y and Dai Y: Advances in the application of molecular diagnostic techniques for the detection of infectious disease pathogens (Review). Mol Med Rep 27: 104, 2023.
APA
Liu, Q., Jin, X., Cheng, J., Zhou, H., Zhang, Y., & Dai, Y. (2023). Advances in the application of molecular diagnostic techniques for the detection of infectious disease pathogens (Review). Molecular Medicine Reports, 27, 104. https://doi.org/10.3892/mmr.2023.12991
MLA
Liu, Q., Jin, X., Cheng, J., Zhou, H., Zhang, Y., Dai, Y."Advances in the application of molecular diagnostic techniques for the detection of infectious disease pathogens (Review)". Molecular Medicine Reports 27.5 (2023): 104.
Chicago
Liu, Q., Jin, X., Cheng, J., Zhou, H., Zhang, Y., Dai, Y."Advances in the application of molecular diagnostic techniques for the detection of infectious disease pathogens (Review)". Molecular Medicine Reports 27, no. 5 (2023): 104. https://doi.org/10.3892/mmr.2023.12991