Akademik Veri Yönetim Sistemi
Mikrobiyoloji Bulteni, cilt.56, sa.1, ss.68-80, 2022 (SCI-Expanded)
© 2022 Ankara Microbiology Society. All rights reserved.Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) is a virus that is estimated to infect approximately 185 million people worldwide and causes 350 000 deaths each year. The target in HCV treatment is the sustained virological response (SVR), and the most important virological factors determining SVR are genotype and baseline HCV-RNA levels. In this study, it was aimed to compare the HCV genotypes and subtypes detected by the “line probe assay (LIPA)” method with sequence analysis. HCV genotypes and subtypes were investigated by line probe assay (LIPA) (NLM analytica, Italy) and sequence analysis methods in 212 patients with chronic HCV diagnosis and with HCV RNA viral load of 104 IU/ml and above. 5’UTR and core regions were studied in LIPA method and NS5B gene region was studied in the sequencing method. After amplifying 340 bp region in the NS5B gene region with the hemi-nested PCR method, sequence analysis (ABI 3500 Genetic Analyzer [Applied Biosystems, USA]) was performed. Statistical analysis of the study was determined by using TURCOSA Analytics program. In the study, HCV genotypes and subtypes that were determined in 212 patients by LIPA method were; 40 (18.8%) genotype 1a, 97 (45.75%) genotype 1b, 7 (3.3%) genotype 2, 12 (5.6%) genotype 2a/c, 2 (0.94%) genotype 2b, 19 (8.96%) genotype 3, 16 (7.55%) genotype 4, 1 (0.47%) genotype 4a, 15 (7.5%) genotype 4c/d, 1 (0.47%) genotype 4h and 2 (0.94%) genotype 5. The HCV genotypes and subtypes determined in 212 patients by sequence analysis were; 20 (9.43%) genotype 1a, 118 (55.6%) genotype 1b, 16 (7.55%) genotype 2a, 4 (1.89%) genotype 2b, 1 (0.47%) genotype 2k, 21 (9.91%) genotype 3a, 2 (0.94%) genotype 4a, 28 (13.21%) genotype 4d and 2 (0.94%) genotype 5a. The difference in results between the two methods was found to be statistically significant (p< 0.001). According to the viral load-genotype relationship, the highest viral load was detected in genotype 1a patients (p< 0.001). In conclusion, in order to determine HCV genotypes and subtypes in our study, LIPA and sequence analysis methods were compared and the genotype compatibility between the two methods were determined as 97.5% on the basis of genotype and 19% on the basis of subtype. Since the direct-acting antiviral (DEA) treatment protocol in chronic HCV patients is planned according to the genotype/subtype determination, the inconsistency of the results obtained in the LIPA method, which is routinely widely used, with the sequence analysis method is remarkable, and it was concluded that these results should be supported by studies containing more samples.