Design and Implementation of Improved SARS-CoV-2 Diagnostic Assays To Mitigate the Impact of Genomic Mutations on Target Failure: the Xpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2 Experience.

In 2020, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) enabled manufacturers to request emergency use authorization (EUA) to facilitate the rapid authorization of in vitro diagnostic (IVD) platforms for the detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Uncommon SARS-CoV-2 point mutations could cause nucleocapsid (N) gene target failure (NGTF) when using first-generation Xpert Xpress assays, so improvements were designed and implemented. In response to NGTF reports and with consideration of viral genomic information in public databases, the Xpress assays were redesigned to mitigate the impact of SARS-CoV-2 mutations on qualitative assay performance. The second-generation assays include a third gene target (RNA-dependent RNA polymerase [RdRp]) and redundant oligonucleotide probes for the N2 target. First- and second-generation assay performances were evaluated using a challenge set of samples. A second-generation assay with updated oligonucleotide chemistry received FDA EUA in September 2021. A prototype assay with oligonucleotide chemistry similar to that of the second-generation assay with FDA EUA successfully detected all three gene targets (N2, envelope [E], and RdRp) in all challenge samples (100%; 50/50), including variants with N gene mutations (g.29197C>T or g.29200C>T), which caused NGTF in the first-generation assays. Investigation and reporting of IVD target failures, public sharing of viral genomic sequence data, and the FDA EUA pathway were essential components in facilitating a short cycle time from the identification of mutations that impact the performance of an IVD assay to the design and implementation of an improved IVD assay. IMPORTANCE The SARS-CoV-2 genome has mutated during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Some of these mutations have impacted the performance of nucleic acid amplification tests like PCR, which are commonly used as diagnostic tools to detect an infection. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) emergency use authorization (EUA) process enables the rapid reformulation and regulatory authorization of improved PCRs. In our experience, the identification of SARS-CoV-2 mutations that impact PCR performance, the subsequent development of improved PCR chemistry, and the use of the FDA EUA regulatory pathway led to improved diagnostic performance during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic that is able to keep pace with the rapidly evolving genome of SARS-CoV-2.

As Omicron Takes Hold and Other New Variants Arise, COVID-19 Testing Remains the Universally Agreed Tool to Effect Transition From Pandemic to Endemic State.

The COVID-19 pandemic has caused more than 448 million cases and 6 million deaths worldwide to date. Omicron is now the dominant SARS-CoV-2 variant, making up more than 90% of cases in countries reporting sequencing data. As the pandemic continues into its third year, continued testing is a strategic and necessary tool for transitioning to an endemic state of COVID-19. Here, we address three critical topics pertaining to the transition from pandemic to endemic: defining the endemic state for COVID-19, highlighting the role of SARS-CoV-2 testing as endemicity is approached, and recommending parameters for SARS-CoV-2 testing once endemicity is reached. We argue for an approach that capitalizes on the current public health momentum to increase capacity for PCR-based testing and whole genome sequencing to monitor emerging infectious diseases. Strategic development and utilization of testing, including viral panels in addition to vaccination, can keep SARS-CoV-2 in a manageable endemic state and build a framework of preparedness for the next pandemic.

Clinical and Infection Prevention Applications of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Genotyping: an Infectious Diseases Society of America/American Society for Microbiology Consensus Review Document.

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) emerged into a world of maturing pathogen genomics, with more than 2 million genomes sequenced at the time of writing. The rise of more transmissible variants of concern that impact vaccine and therapeutic effectiveness has led to widespread interest in SARS-CoV-2 evolution. Clinicians are also eager to take advantage of the information provided by SARS-CoV-2 genotyping beyond surveillance purposes. Here, we review the potential role of SARS-CoV-2 genotyping in clinical care. The review covers clinical use cases for SARS-CoV-2 genotyping, methods of SARS-CoV-2 genotyping, assay validation and regulatory requirements, and clinical reporting for laboratories, as well as emerging issues in clinical SARS-CoV-2 sequencing. While clinical uses of SARS-CoV-2 genotyping are currently limited, rapid technological change along with a growing ability to interpret variants in real time foretells a growing role for SARS-CoV-2 genotyping in clinical care as continuing data emerge on vaccine and therapeutic efficacy.

Partial ORF1ab Gene Target Failure with Omicron BA.2.12.1.

Mutations in the genome of SARS-CoV-2 can affect the performance of molecular diagnostic assays. In some cases, such as S-gene target failure, the impact can serve as a unique indicator of a particular SARS-CoV-2 variant and provide a method for rapid detection. Here, we describe partial ORF1ab gene target failure (pOGTF) on the cobas SARS-CoV-2 assays, defined by a ≥2-thermocycle delay in detection of the ORF1ab gene compared to that of the E-gene. We demonstrate that pOGTF is 98.6% sensitive and 99.9% specific for SARS-CoV-2 lineage BA.2.12.1, an emerging variant in the United States with spike L452Q and S704L mutations that may affect transmission, infectivity, and/or immune evasion. Increasing rates of pOGTF closely mirrored rates of BA.2.12.1 sequences uploaded to public databases, and, importantly, increasing local rates of pOGTF also mirrored increasing overall test positivity. Use of pOGTF as a proxy for BA.2.12.1 provides faster tracking of the variant than whole-genome sequencing and can benefit laboratories without sequencing capabilities.

Clinical and Infection Prevention Applications of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Genotyping: An Infectious Diseases Society of America/American Society for Microbiology Consensus Review Document.

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) emerged into a world of maturing pathogen genomics, with >2 million genomes sequenced at this writing. The rise of more transmissible variants of concern that affect vaccine and therapeutic effectiveness has led to widespread interest in SARS-CoV-2 evolution. Clinicians are also eager to take advantage of the information provided by SARS-CoV-2 genotyping beyond surveillance purposes. Here, we review the potential role of SARS-CoV-2 genotyping in clinical care. The review covers clinical use cases for SARS-CoV-2 genotyping, methods of SARS-CoV-2 genotyping, assay validation and regulatory requirements, clinical reporting for laboratories, and emerging issues in clinical SARS-CoV-2 sequencing. While clinical uses of SARS-CoV-2 genotyping are currently limited, rapid technological change along with a growing ability to interpret variants in real time foretell a growing role for SARS-CoV-2 genotyping in clinical care as continuing data emerge on vaccine and therapeutic efficacy.

Considerations from the College of American Pathologists for Implementation of an Assay for SARS-CoV-2 Testing after a Change in Regulatory Status.

The U.S. Food & Drug Administration (FDA) regulates the marketing of manufacturers' in vitro diagnostic tests (IVDs), including assays for the detection of SARS-CoV-2. The U.S. government's Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments (CLIA) of 1988 regulates the studies that a clinical diagnostic laboratory needs to perform for an IVD before placing it into use. Until recently, the FDA has authorized the marketing of SARS-CoV-2 IVDs exclusively through the Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) pathway. The regulatory landscape continues to evolve, and IVDs will eventually be required to pass through conventional non-EUA FDA review pathways once the emergency declaration is terminated, in order to continue to be marketed as an IVD in the United States. When FDA regulatory status of an IVD changes or is anticipated to change, the laboratory should review manufacturer information and previously performed internal verification studies to determine what, if any, additional studies are needed before implementing the non-EUA version of the IVD in accordance with CLIA regulations. Herein, the College of American Pathologists' Microbiology Committee provides guidance for how to approach regulatory considerations when an IVD is converted from EUA to non-EUA status.

Specificity of SARS-CoV-2 Real-Time PCR Improved by Deep Learning Analysis.

Real-time PCR (RT-PCR) is widely used to diagnose human pathogens. RT-PCR data are traditionally analyzed by estimating the threshold cycle (CT ) at which the fluorescence signal produced by emission of a probe crosses a baseline level. Current models used to estimate the CT value are based on approximations that do not adequately account for the stochastic variations of the fluorescence signal that is detected during RT-PCR. Less common deviations become more apparent as the sample size increases, as is the case in the current SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. In this work, we employ a method independent of CT value to interpret RT-PCR data. In this novel approach, we built and trained a deep learning model, qPCRdeepNet, to analyze the fluorescent readings obtained during RT-PCR. We describe how this model can be deployed as a quality assurance tool to monitor result interpretation in real time. The model's performance with the TaqPath COVID19 Combo Kit assay, widely used for SARS-CoV-2 detection, is described. This model can be applied broadly for the primary interpretation of RT-PCR assays and potentially replace the CT interpretive paradigm.

Interlaboratory Agreement of Anti-Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) Serologic Assays in the Expedited College of American Pathologists Proficiency Testing Program.

CONTEXT.­: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is a recently emerged, currently pandemic virus, and the etiologic agent of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Clinical testing for antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 has rapidly become widespread, but data regarding the interlaboratory performance of these serologic assays are limited. OBJECTIVE.­: To describe the development and initial results of the College of American Pathologists (CAP) SARS-CoV-2 Serology Survey. DESIGN.­: Members from the CAP Microbiology and Diagnostic Immunology and Flow Cytometry Committees formed a working group to support development of a new proficiency testing survey for anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody assays. Supplemental questions in the survey assessed the state of SARS-CoV-2 serologic testing among participating laboratories as of July 2020. Results were analyzed for agreement by immunoglobulin (Ig) isotype tested, assay manufacturer, and methodology. RESULTS.­: A total of 4125 qualitative results were received from 1110 laboratories participating in the first survey. Qualitative agreement for assays measuring anti-SARS-CoV-2 total antibodies or IgG was greater than 90% for all 3 samples in the survey. Qualitative agreement for IgM and IgA for the negative sample was greater than 95%, but lacked consensus for the other 2 samples. CONCLUSIONS.­: These initial data suggest overall excellent agreement and comparable performance for most qualitative anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG and total antibody assays across all participating clinical laboratories, regardless of specific target antigen or assay methodology.

Home testing for COVID-19: Benefits and limitations.

The home test kits for detecting SARS-CoV-2 infection with Food and Drug Administration emergency use authorization primarily use either isothermal nucleic acid amplification or antigen detection, and each test has advantages and limitations in terms of sensitivity and specificity, cost, results reporting, and results turnaround time. In clinical studies, these tests provide accurate positive results in symptomatic individuals, although negative results are less accurate. There are also accuracy concerns for positive results in asymptomatic individuals. These factors have implications for their clinical interpretation and use.

Asymptomatic Patient Testing After 10:1 Pooling Using the Xpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2 Assay.

OBJECTIVES: Pool testing for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) preserves testing resources at the risk of missing specimens through specimen dilution. METHODS: To determine whether SARS-CoV-2 specimens would be missed after 10:1 pooling, we identified 10 specimens with midrange (ie, 25-34 cycles) and 10 with late (ie, >34-45 cycles) crossing threshold (Ct) values and tested these both neat and after 10:1 pooling. Final test results and Ct changes were compared. RESULTS: Overall, 17 of 20 specimens that contained SARS-CoV-2 were detected after 10:1 pooling with the Xpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2 Assay (Cepheid), rendering an 85% positive percentage of agreement. All 10 of 10 specimens with an undiluted Ct in the mid-Ct range were detected after 10:1 pooling, in contrast to 7 of 10 with an undiluted Ct in the late-Ct range. The overall Ct difference between the neat testing and the 10:1 pool was 2.9 cycles for the N2 gene target and 3 cycles for the E gene target. The N2 gene reaction was more sensitive than the E gene reaction, detecting 16 of 20 positive specimens after 10:1 pooling compared with 9 of 20 specimens. CONCLUSIONS: An 85% positive percentage of agreement was achieved, with only specimens with low viral loads being missed following 10:1 pooling. The average impact on both reverse transcription polymerase chain reactions within this assay was about 3 cycles.

Understanding, Verifying, and Implementing Emergency Use Authorization Molecular Diagnostics for the Detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA.

The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic has brought a new wave of challenges to health care, particularly in the area of rapid diagnostic test development and implementation. The diagnosis of acute coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is critically dependent on the detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA from clinical specimens (e.g., nasopharyngeal swabs). While laboratory-developed testing for SARS-CoV-2 is an essential component of diagnostic testing for this virus, the majority of clinical microbiology laboratories are dependent on commercially available SARS-CoV-2 molecular assays. In contrast to assays approved or cleared by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for in vitro diagnostic use, assays for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acids have emergency use authorization (EUA) from the FDA. Outside of highly specialized academic and commercial laboratory settings, clinical microbiology laboratories are likely unfamiliar with the EUA classification, and thus, assay verification can be daunting. Further compounding anxiety for laboratories are major issues with the supply chain that are dramatically affecting the availability of test reagents and requiring laboratories to implement multiple commercial EUA tests. Here, we describe guidance for the verification of assays with EUA for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid from clinical specimens.

A Direct Comparison of Enhanced Saliva to Nasopharyngeal Swab for the Detection of SARS-CoV-2 in Symptomatic Patients.

The ongoing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has resulted in shortages of nasopharyngeal swabs (NPS) and viral transport media, necessitating the search for alternate diagnostic specimens, such as saliva. We directly compared matched saliva and NPS specimens from symptomatic patients suspected of having COVID-19. An enhanced saliva specimen (i.e., strong sniff, elicited cough, and collection of saliva/secretions) was collected without transport medium prior to collection of NPS from 224 patients with symptoms deemed consistent with COVID-19. Both specimens were tested with the CDC 2019 nCoV real-time RT-PCR diagnostic panel (4 February 2020 version), with the NPS result used as the reference standard. For the 216 patients included in the final analysis, there was 100% positive agreement (38/38 positive specimens) and 99.4% negative agreement (177/178 negative specimens). The one discrepant specimen had the presence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) confirmed in the saliva specimen using an alternate FDA EUA assay. The overall mean difference in cycle threshold (CT ) values for the positive NPS and saliva specimens was -3.61 (95% confidence interval [CI], -5.78 to -1.44; P = 0.002). An enhanced saliva specimen performed as well as NPS for the qualitative detection of SARS-CoV-2 in symptomatic patients, although the overall mean viral load in saliva was lower.