R. Boldorini et al., Cytologic and biomolecular diagnosis of polyomavirus infection in urine specimens of HIV-positive patients, ACT CYTOL, 44(2), 2000, pp. 205-210
Citations number
18
Categorie Soggetti
Research/Laboratory Medicine & Medical Tecnology","Medical Research Diagnosis & Treatment
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the frequency of human polyomavirus reactivation in
urine specimens from HIV-positive patients; compare the sensitivity of cyto
logy, immunohistochemistry and molecular biology; differentiate viral genot
ypes; and correlate the results with urinary cytologic abnormalities.
STUDY DESIGN: Urine specimens from 78 unselected HIV-positive patients were
evaluated by means of cytology, immunohistochemistry and nested polymerase
chain reaction (n-PCR) to evaluate the presence of polyomaviruses. Restric
tion fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) was carried out in positive cases
in order to differentiate BK virus (BKV) from JC virus (JCV). CD4 cells and
serum creatinine levels were evaluated as indices of immune status and ren
al function, respectively, whereas the presence of red blood cells was used
as an index of urogenital damage. RESULTS: Cytologic evidence of polyomavi
rus infection was found in 17 samples and immunohistochemically confirmed i
n 9; another 6 cytologically negative cases were detected by means of immun
ohistochemistry. In all cases, only one or two cells showed typical viral i
nclusions or positive staining. n-PCR identified 44 positive samples, thus
confirming all of the cytologically and immunohistochemically positive case
s and detecting polyomavirus genome in a further 21. RFLP detected 39 JCV,
1 BKV and 4 JCV-BKV infections. No correlation was found between the presen
ce ou type of polyomavirus and immune status, but red blood cells were foun
d mol frequently in the positive than in the negative samples. Serum creati
nine levels fell within the normal range in all cases.
CONCLUSION: Molecular biology is the most sensitive tool for detecting poly
omavirus urinary infection in HIV-positive patients and the only reliable m
ethod of differentiating JCV and BKV viral genotypes.