Improved sensitivity, safety, and rapidity of COVID-19 tests by replacing viral storage solution with lysis buffer.

Conducting numerous, rapid, and reliable PCR tests for SARS-CoV-2 is essential for our ability to monitor and control the current COVID-19 pandemic. Here, we tested the sensitivity and efficiency of SARS-CoV-2 detection in clinical samples collected directly into a mix of lysis buffer and RNA preservative, thus inactivating the virus immediately after sampling. We tested 79 COVID-19 patients and 20 healthy controls. We collected two samples (nasopharyngeal swabs) from each participant: one swab was inserted into a test tube with Viral Transport Medium (VTM), following the standard guideline used as the recommended method for sample collection; the other swab was inserted into a lysis buffer supplemented with nucleic acid stabilization mix (coined NSLB). We found that RT-qPCR tests of patients were significantly more sensitive with NSLB sampling, reaching detection threshold 2.1±0.6 (Mean±SE) PCR cycles earlier then VTM samples from the same patient. We show that this improvement is most likely since NSLB samples are not diluted in lysis buffer before RNA extraction. Re-extracting RNA from NSLB samples after 72 hours at room temperature did not affect the sensitivity of detection, demonstrating that NSLB allows for long periods of sample preservation without special cooling equipment. We also show that swirling the swab in NSLB and discarding it did not reduce sensitivity compared to retaining the swab in the tube, thus allowing improved automation of COVID-19 tests. Overall, we show that using NSLB instead of VTM can improve the sensitivity, safety, and rapidity of COVID-19 tests at a time most needed.

Evaluation of COVID-19 RT-qPCR Test in Multi sample Pools.

BACKGROUND: The recent emergence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) led to a current pandemic of unprecedented scale. Although diagnostic tests are fundamental to the ability to detect and respond, overwhelmed healthcare systems are already experiencing shortages of reagents associated with this test, calling for a lean immediately applicable protocol. METHODS: RNA extracts of positive samples were tested for the presence of SARS-CoV-2 using reverse transcription quantitative polymerase chain reaction, alone or in pools of different sizes (2-, 4-, 8-, 16-, 32-, and 64-sample pools) with negative samples. Transport media of additional 3 positive samples were also tested when mixed with transport media of negative samples in pools of 8. RESULTS: A single positive sample can be detected in pools of up to 32 samples, using the standard kits and protocols, with an estimated false negative rate of 10%. Detection of positive samples diluted in even up to 64 samples may also be attainable, although this may require additional amplification cycles. Single positive samples can be detected when pooling either after or prior to RNA extraction. CONCLUSIONS: As it uses the standard protocols, reagents, and equipment, this pooling method can be applied immediately in current clinical testing laboratories. We hope that such implementation of a pool test for coronavirus disease 2019 would allow expanding current screening capacities, thereby enabling the expansion of detection in the community, as well as in close organic groups, such as hospital departments, army units, or factory shifts.