Accuracy of Real-Time Polymerase Chain Reaction in COVID-19 Patients.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a mild to severe respiratory illness caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). The diagnostic accuracy of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)- or World Health Organization (WHO)-recommended real-time PCR (RT-qPCR) primers in clinical practice remains unproven. We conducted a prospective study on the accuracy of RT-qPCR using an in-house-designed primer set (iNP) targeting the nucleocapsid protein as well as various recommended and commercial primers. The accuracy was assessed by culturing or seroconversion. We enrolled 12 confirmed COVID-19 patients with a total of 590 clinical samples. When a cutoff value of the cycle threshold (Ct) was set to 35, RT-qPCRs with WHO RdRp primers and CDC N1, N2, and N3 primers showed sensitivity of 42.1% to 63.2% and specificity of 90.5% to 100% in sputum, and sensitivity of 65.2% to 69.6% and specificity of 65.2% to 69.6% in nasopharyngeal samples. The sensitivity and specificity of iNP RT-qPCR in sputum and nasopharyngeal samples were 94.8%/100% and 69.6%/100%, respectively. Sputum testing had the highest sensitivity, followed by nasopharyngeal testing (P = 0.0193); self-collected saliva samples yielded better characteristics than oropharyngeal samples (P = 0.0032). Our results suggest that iNP RT-qPCR has better sensitivity and specificity than RT-PCR with WHO (P < 0.0001) or CDC (N1: P = 0.0012, N2: P = 0.0013, N3: P = 0.0012) primers. Sputum RT-qPCR analysis has the highest sensitivity, followed by nasopharyngeal, saliva, and oropharyngeal assays. Our study suggests that considerable improvement is needed for the RT-qPCR WHO and CDC primer sets for detecting SARS-CoV-2. IMPORTANCE Numerous research campaigns have addressed the vast majority of clinical and diagnostic specificity and sensitivity of various primer sets of SARS-CoV2 viral detection. Despite the impressive progress made to resolve the pandemic, there is still a need for continuous and active improvement of primers used for diagnosis in clinical practice. Our study significantly exceeds the scale of previously published research on the specificity and sensitivity of different primers comparing with different specimens and is the most comprehensive to date in terms of constant monitoring of primer sets of current usage. Henceforth, our results suggest that sputum samples sensitivity is the highest, followed by nasopharyngeal, saliva, and oropharyngeal samples. The CDC recommends the use of oropharyngeal specimens, leading to certain discrepancy between the guidelines set forth by the CDC and IDSA. We proved that the oropharyngeal samples demonstrated the lowest sensitivity for the detection of SARS-CoV-2.

Viable Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Isolates Exhibit Higher Correlation With Rapid Antigen Assays Than Subgenomic RNA or Genomic RNA.

Background: Rapid identification and effective isolation are crucial for curbing the spread of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). To meet this requirement, antigen-detection rapid diagnostic tests (Ag-RDTs) are essential. Methods: Between February 2020 and August 2020 we performed a cohort study of patients with confirmed COVID-19. The clinical performance of Ag rapid fluorescence immunoassay (FIA) and Ag Gold was evaluated and compared in parallel with genomic and subgenomic real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR) and cell culture-based assays. Results: In total, 150 samples were tested. Of these, 63 serial samples were obtained from 11 patients with SARS-CoV-2 and 87 from negative controls. Serial respiratory samples were obtained 2 days prior to symptom onset (-2) up to 25 days post-symptom onset. Overall, for rRT-PCR-positive samples (n = 51), the detection sensitivity of Ag rapid FIA and Ag Gold was 74.5% and 53.49%, respectively, with a specificity of 100%; however, for samples with low cycle threshold (Ct) values, Ag rapid FIA and Ag Gold exhibited a sensitivity of 82.61% (Ct ≤ 30, 5.6 log10RNA copies/mL) and 80% (Ct ≤ 25, 6.9 log10RNA copies/mL), respectively. Despite low analytical sensitivity, both Ag-RDTs detected 100% infection in cell culture-positive samples (n = 15) and were highly effective in distinguishing viable samples from those with subgenomic RNA (66.66%). For both Ag-RDTs, all samples that yielded discordant results (rRT-PCR + ve/Ag-RDT -ve) were also negative by culture. Conclusion: The data suggest that Ag-RDTs reliably detect viable SARS-CoV-2; thus, they may serve as an important tool for rapid detection of potentially infectious individuals.

Usefulness of ELISA Using Total Antibody against Plant-Expressed Recombinant Nucleocapsid Protein of SARS-CoV-2.

Here, we aimed to investigate the diagnostic value of a serological assay using the nucleocapsid protein developed for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) detection and evaluated its performance using three commercial enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISAs), namely, Standard E 2019 novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) total antibody (Ab) ELISA (SD Biosensor), and EDI novel coronavirus COVID-19 IgG and IgM ELISA. A recombinant nucleocapsid protein (rNP) was expressed from plants and Escherichia coli for the detection of serum total Ab. We prospectively collected 141 serum samples from 32 patients with reverse transcription-PCR (RT-PCR)-confirmed COVID-19 and determined the sensitivity and dynamics of their total Ab response. Specificity was evaluated using 158 prepandemic samples. To validate the assays, we evaluated the performance using two different cutoff values. The sensitivity and specificity for each assay were as follows: 92.91% and 94.30% (plant-rNP), 83.69% and 98.73% (SD Biosensor), 75.89% and 98.10% (E. coli-rNP), 76.47% and 100% (EDI-IgG), and 80.39% and 80% (EDI-IgM). The plant-based rNP showed the highest sensitivity and area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve (0.980) among all the assays (P < 0.05). The seroconversion rate for total Ab increased sequentially with disease progression, with a sensitivity of 100% after 10 to 12 days of post-symptom onset (PSO) for both rNP-plant-based and SD Biosensor ELISAs. After 2 weeks of PSO, the seroconversion rates were >80% and 100% for EDI-IgM and EDI-IgG ELISA, respectively. Seroconversion occurred earlier with rNP plant-based ELISA (5 days PSO) compared with E. coli-based (7 days PSO) and SD Biosensor (8 days PSO) ELISA. We determined that rNP produced in plants enables the robust detection of SARS-CoV-2 total Abs. The assay can be used for serosurvey and complementary diagnosis of COVID-19. IMPORTANCE At present, the principal diagnostic methods for COVID-19 comprise the identification of viral nucleic acid by genetic approaches, including PCR-based techniques or next-generation sequencing. However, there is an urgent need for validated serological assays which are crucial for the understanding of immune responses against SARS-CoV-2. In this study, a highly sensitive and specific serological antibody assay was developed for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 with an overall accuracy of 93.56% using a recombinant nucleoprotein expressed from plants.