End-to-End Data Automation for Pooled Sample SARS-CoV-2 Using R and Other Open-Source Tools.

BACKGROUND: Due to supply chain shortages of reagents for real-time (RT)-PCR for SARS-CoV-2 and increasing demand on technical staff, an end-to-end data automation strategy for SARS-CoV-2 sample pooling and singleton analysis became necessary in the summer of 2020. METHODS: Using entirely open source software tools-Linux, bash, R, RShiny, ShinyProxy, and Docker-we developed a modular software application stack to manage the preanalytical, analytical, and postanalytical processes for singleton and pooled testing in a 5-week time frame. RESULTS: Pooling was operationalized for 81 days, during which time 64 pooled runs were performed for a total of 5320 sample pools and approximately 21 280 patient samples in 4:1 format. A total of 17 580 negative pooled results were released in bulk. After pooling was discontinued, the application stack was used for singleton analysis and modified to release all viral RT-PCR results from our laboratory. To date, 236 109 samples have been processed avoiding over 610 000 transcriptions. CONCLUSIONS: We present an end-to-end data automation strategy connecting 11 devices, one network attached storage, 2 Linux servers, and the laboratory information system.

Automated Library Construction and Analysis for High-Throughput Nanopore Sequencing of SARS-CoV-2.

BACKGROUND: To support the implementation of high-throughput pipelines suitable for SARS-CoV-2 sequencing and analysis in a clinical laboratory, we developed an automated sample preparation and analysis workflow. METHODS: We used the established ARTIC protocol with approximately 400 bp amplicons sequenced on Oxford Nanopore's MinION. Sequences were analyzed using Nextclade, assigning both a clade and quality score to each sample. RESULTS: A total of 2179 samples on twenty-five 96-well plates were sequenced. Plates of purified RNA were processed within 12 h, sequencing required up to 24 h, and analysis of each pooled plate required 1 h. The use of samples with known threshold cycle (Ct) values enabled normalization, acted as a quality control check, and revealed a strong correlation between sample Ct values and successful analysis, with 85% of samples with Ct < 30 achieving a "good" Nextclade score. Less abundant samples responded to enrichment with the fraction of Ct > 30 samples achieving a "good" classification rising by 60% after addition of a post-ARTIC PCR normalization. Serial dilutions of 3 variant of concern samples, diluted from approximately Ct = 16 to approximately Ct = 50, demonstrated successful sequencing to Ct = 37. The sample set contained a median of 24 mutations per sample and a total of 1281 unique mutations with reduced sequence read coverage noted in some regions of some samples. A total of 10 separate strains were observed in the sample set, including 3 variants of concern prevalent in British Columbia in the spring of 2021. CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrated a robust automated sequencing pipeline that takes advantage of input Ct values to improve reliability.

Repeat virological and serological profiles in hospitalized patients initially tested by nasopharyngeal RT-PCR for SARS-CoV-2.

Real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR) for SARS-CoV-2 is the mainstay of COVID-19 diagnosis, yet there are conflicting reports on its diagnostic performance. Wide ranges of false-negative PCR tests have been reported depending on clinical presentation, the timing of testing, specimens tested, testing method, and reference standard used. We aimed to estimate the frequency of discordance between initial nasopharyngeal (NP) PCR and repeat NP sampling PCR and serology in acutely ill patients admitted to the hospital. Panel diagnosis of COVID-19 infection is further utilized in discordance analysis. Included in the study were 160 patients initially tested by NP PCR with repeat NP sampling PCR and/or serology performed. The percent agreement between initial and repeat PCR was 96.7%, while the percent agreement between initial PCR and serology was 98.9%. There were 5 (3.1%) cases with discordance on repeat testing. After discordance analysis, 2 (1.4%) true cases tested negative on initial PCR. Using available diagnostic methods, discordance on repeat NP sampling PCR and/or serology is a rare occurrence.

SARS-CoV-2 RNA Quantification Using Droplet Digital RT-PCR.

Quantitative viral load assays have transformed our understanding of viral diseases. They hold similar potential to advance COVID-19 control and prevention, but SARS-CoV-2 viral load tests are not yet widely available. SARS-CoV-2 molecular diagnostic tests, which typically employ real-time RT-PCR, yield semiquantitative results only. Droplet digital RT-PCR (RT-ddPCR) offers an attractive platform for SARS-CoV-2 RNA quantification. Eight primer/probe sets originally developed for real-time RT-PCR-based SARS-CoV-2 diagnostic tests were evaluated for use in RT-ddPCR; three were identified as the most efficient, precise, and sensitive for RT-ddPCR-based SARS-CoV-2 RNA quantification. For example, the analytical efficiency for the E-Sarbeco primer/probe set was approximately 83%, whereas assay precision, measured as the coefficient of variation, was approximately 2% at 1000 input copies/reaction. Lower limits of quantification and detection for this primer/probe set were 18.6 and 4.4 input SARS-CoV-2 RNA copies/reaction, respectively. SARS-CoV-2 RNA viral loads in a convenience panel of 48 COVID-19-positive diagnostic specimens spanned a 6.2log10 range, confirming substantial viral load variation in vivo. RT-ddPCR-derived SARS-CoV-2 E gene copy numbers were further calibrated against cycle threshold values from a commercial real-time RT-PCR diagnostic platform. This log-linear relationship can be used to mathematically derive SARS-CoV-2 RNA copy numbers from cycle threshold values, allowing the wealth of available diagnostic test data to be harnessed to address foundational questions in SARS-CoV-2 biology.

Rapid Detection of SARS-CoV-2 Variants of Concern, Including B.1.1.28/P.1, British Columbia, Canada.

To screen all severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2-positive samples in Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, and determine whether they represented variants of concern, we implemented a real-time reverse transcription PCR-based algorithm. We rapidly identified 77 samples with variants: 57 with B.1.1.7, 7 with B.1.351, and an epidemiologic cluster of 13 with B.1.1.28/P.1.

Microchip RT-PCR Detection of Nasopharyngeal SARS-CoV-2 Samples.

Fast, accurate, and reliable diagnostic tests are critical for controlling the spread of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) associated with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. The current gold standard for testing is real-time PCR; however, during the current pandemic, supplies of testing kits and reagents have been limited. We report the validation of a rapid (30 minutes), user-friendly, and accurate microchip real-time PCR assay for detection of SARS-CoV-2 from nasopharyngeal swab RNA extracts. Microchips preloaded with COVID-19 primers and probes for the N gene accommodate 1.2-µL reaction volumes, lowering the required reagents by 10-fold compared with tube-based real-time PCR. We validated our assay using contrived reference samples and 21 clinical samples from patients in Canada, determining a limit of detection of 1 copy per reaction. The microchip real-time PCR provides a significantly lower resource alternative to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention-approved real-time RT-PCR assays with comparable sensitivity, showing 100% positive and negative predictive agreement of clinical samples.

Automated molecular testing of saliva for SARS-CoV-2 detection.

With surging global demand for SARS-CoV-2 testing capacity, laboratories seek automated, high-throughput molecular solutions, particularly for specimens not requiring specialized collection devices or viral transport media. Saliva specimens submitted from patients under investigation for COVID-19 from March to July 2020 were processed in the laboratory with sterile phosphate-buffered saline in a 1:2 dilution and tested using manual extraction and a commercial assay for detection of the SARS-CoV-2 E gene (LightMix®) in comparison to the Roche cobas® SARS-CoV-2 Test on the cobas® 6800 instrument. 34.4% (22/64) of saliva samples were positive for SARS-CoV-2. Positive and negative concordance between the LightMix® and cobas® assays were 100%. The overall invalid rate for saliva on the cobas® 6800 (1/128, 0.78%) was similar to the baseline invalid rate observed for nasopharyngeal swabs/viral transport media. Saliva is a feasible specimen type for SARS-CoV-2 testing on the cobas® 6800 platform, with potential to improve turnaround time and enhance testing capacity.

Practical challenges to the clinical implementation of saliva for SARS-CoV-2 detection.

Due to global shortages of flocked nasopharyngeal swabs and appropriate viral transport media during the COVID-19 pandemic, alternate diagnostic specimens for SARS-CoV-2 detection are sought. The accuracy and feasibility of saliva samples collected and transported without specialized collection devices or media were evaluated. Saliva demonstrated good concordance with paired nasopharyngeal swabs for SARS-CoV-2 detection in 67/74 cases (90.5%), though barriers to saliva collection were observed in long-term care residents and outbreak settings. SARS-CoV-2 RNA was stable in human saliva at room temperature for up to 48 h after initial specimen collection, informing appropriate transport time and conditions.

Evaluation of Nasopharyngeal Swab Collection Techniques for Nucleic Acid Recovery and Participant Experience: Recommendations for COVID-19 Diagnostics.

Nasopharyngeal swabs are critical to the diagnosis of respiratory infections including coronavirus disease 2019, but collection techniques vary. We compared 2 recommended nasopharyngeal swab collection techniques in adult volunteers and found that swab rotation following nasopharyngeal contact did not recover additional nucleic acid (as measured by human DNA/RNA copy number). Rotation was also less tolerable for participants. Notably, both discomfort and nucleic acid recovery were significantly higher in Asian participants, consistent with nasal anatomy differences. Our results suggest that it is unnecessary to rotate the swab in place following contact with the nasopharynx and reveal that procedural discomfort levels can differ by ethnicity.

Suboptimal Biological Sampling as a Probable Cause of False-Negative COVID-19 Diagnostic Test Results.

False-negative severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 test results can negatively impact the clinical and public health response to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We used droplet digital polymerase chain reaction (ddPCR) to demonstrate that human DNA levels, a stable molecular marker of sampling quality, were significantly lower in samples from 40 confirmed or suspected COVID-19 cases that yielded negative diagnostic test results (ie, suspected false-negative test results) compared with a representative pool of 87 specimens submitted for COVID-19 testing. Our results support suboptimal biological sampling as a contributor to false-negative COVID-19 test results and underscore the importance of proper training and technique in the collection of nasopharyngeal specimens.

Detection of low levels of SARS-CoV-2 RNA from nasopharyngeal swabs using three commercial molecular assays.

In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, commercial molecular assays for SARS-CoV-2 testing have been rapidly developed and broadly deployed in laboratories worldwide. Although these assays have been reported to correlate well, we sought to compare the Xpert® Xpress SARS-CoV-2 to the cobas® SARS-CoV-2 or the Lightmix® Modular SARS and Wuhan CoV E-gene assay for nasopharyngeal (NP) swabs with low levels of SARS-CoV-2 RNA. Thirty-seven NP swabs were studied, including 10 samples with a moderate cycle threshold (Ct) between 30-33.9, and 22 with Ct≥34, and 5 negative for SARS-CoV-2. Overall concordance on initial comparison was 86.5 % (32/37), which was 100 % concordance for samples with Ct values ranging between 30-33.9. Discordance amongst samples showing a Ct ≥34 was 22.7 % (5/22). Endpoint value analysis on the Xpress SARS-CoV-2 within the discordant samples noted two with an endpoint value >5, which were detected by the cobas® or Lightmix®. Testing of SARS-CoV-2 on the three commercial assays was comparable for NP swabs with moderate Ct values, while high Ct values were less concordant. Importantly, analysis of Xpert® endpoint values improved interpretation of discrepant results.