Effective bubble-based testing for SARS-CoV-2 using swab-pooling.

OBJECTIVES: Despite the success in developing COVID-19 vaccines, containment of the disease is obstructed worldwide by vaccine production bottlenecks, logistics hurdles, vaccine refusal, transmission through unvaccinated children, and the appearance of new viral variants. This underscores the need for effective strategies for identifying carriers/patients, which was the main aim of this study. METHODS: We present a bubble-based PCR testing approach using swab-pooling into lysis buffer. A bubble is a cluster of people who can be periodically tested for SARS-CoV-2 by swab-pooling. A positive test of a pool mandates quarantining each of its members, who are then individually tested while in isolation to identify the carrier(s) for further epidemiological contact tracing. RESULTS: We tested an overall sample of 25 831 individuals, divided into 1273 bubbles, with an average size of 20.3 ± 7.7 swabs/test tube, obtaining for all pools (≤37 swabs/pool) a specificity of 97.5% (lower bound 96.6%) and a sensitivity of 86.3% (lower bound 78.2%) and a post hoc analyzed sensitivity of 94.6% (lower bound 86.7%) and a specificity of 97.2% (lower bound 96.2%) in pools with ≤25 swabs, relative to individual testing. DISCUSSION: This approach offers a significant scale-up in sampling and testing throughput and savings in testing cost, without reducing sensitivity or affecting the standard PCR testing laboratory routine. It can be used in school classes, airplanes, hospitals, military units, and workplaces, and may be applicable to future pandemics.

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.