Comparative analysis of specificity and sensitivity between Cobas 6800 system and SARS-CoV-2 rRT-PCR to detect COVID-19 infection in clinical samples.

Fast and reliable testing for the COVID 19 infection is the need of the hour for the development of effective and reliable tools and assays. However, it is difficult to find the performance relativity among all these tests which are poorly understood. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the two different platforms where we determine the difference of sensitivity and specificity between the fully automated analyzer (Roche Diagnostics Cobas 6800 SARS-CoV-2 test) under FDA Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) and the laboratory designed test (SARS-CoV-2 rRT-PCR) based on the protocol developed by ICMR (Indian Council for Medical Research). The study was conducted for individual samples. We performed our study with two different approaches, first with validation method consisting of 188 samples (2 batches) on cobas 6800 instrument (Roche Molecular Systems, Branchburg, NJ) soon after we received US FDA EUA on 1 June 2021, all these samples were tested earlier with laboratory designed tests on 25th and 26th May 2021. Over all agreement between the two tests is of 88% and the coefficient of agreement between the two testing platform Cohen'sκ coefficient was found to be 0.76 (95% CI, 2.5897-13.4103) suggesting the substantial agreement between the two platforms. However, in some of the cases, both tests have shown a little disagreement. An overall discordance rate between two systems was found 11.1%. The difference may be due to the limit of detection, variation in the sequences of the primer design or may be due to other factors depicting the importance of comparing the two platforms used in the testing for SARS-CoV-2. Second approach includes head to head evaluation which comprises 1631 samples showed overall agreement of 99% and kappa value of 0.98. These results showed that cobas is effective and reliable assay for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Comparison between the analytical sensitivity and clinical performance of two cobas SARS-CoV-2 tests based on high-throughput and point-of-care systems.

Objectives: This study examined analytical sensitivity, specificity, and the clinical performance in detecting SARS-CoV-2 of the Cobas SARS-CoV-2 Test based on the high-throughput Cobas 6800 system and the Cobas SARS-CoV-2 & Flu A/B Test based on the point-of-care cobas Liat system. Methods: The commercial reagents containing SARS-CoV-2 RNA subgenomes were diluted for assessing the sensitivity of the RT-qPCR assay. 385 nasopharyngeal swab specimens taken from contacts of COVID-19 cases were tested for the SARS-CoV-2 detection with both Cobas SARS-CoV-2 Tests. Results: In analytical sensitivity assays, the Cobas SARS-CoV-2 & Flu A/B Test on the Liat system had a lower limit of detection (12.5-25 copies/mL) than the cobas SARS-CoV-2 Test on the cobas 6800 system (25-50 copies/mL). In clinical performance assays, the cobas SARS-CoV-2 Test demonstrated 89.36% (42 out of 47) PPA (positive percent agreement) and 98.82% (334 out of 338) NPA (negative percent agreement) compared to the results of the Cobas SARS-CoV-2 & Flu A/B test. Among five discordant specimens, four had the positive result of the cobas SARS-CoV-2 test, but the negative result of the cobas SARS-CoV-2 & Flu A/B Test. Moreover, these discordant specimens had the Ct values of greater than 33 for the cobas SARS-CoV-2 Test, implying a very small number of virions in the samples. Remarkably, four specimens with a presumptive positive result of the cobas SARS-CoV-2 test had been confirmed by the Cobas SARS-CoV-2 & Flu A/B Test. Next, the scatter plots of the Ct values showed a highly positive correlation between cobas SARS-CoV-2 & Flu A/B Test and the cobas SARS-CoV-2 Test (R-squared value = 0.954-0.962). Conclusions: Both SARS-CoV2 tests of the cobas 6800 and Liat systems produce reliable high throughput and point-of-care assays respectively for the early virus detection and the personal care decision-making during COVID-19 pandemic.

Pooled testing for SARS-CoV-2 infection in an automated high-throughput platform.

BACKGROUND: Active detection of SARS-CoV-2 infection through testing is elementary for the control of COVID-19 pandemic. The implementation of large-scale RT-PCR testing has led to a rise in the demand for testing kits whose availability is always a concern. OBJECTIVE: To find out the feasibility of pooled testing in a high-throughput platform. METHODOLOGY: Pooled testing was conducted in Roche cobas 6800 in 2 methods. Firstly, the simple two-stage testing algorithm was conducted for 1410 samples individually and then as pooled samples. Secondly, we evaluated the sensitivity of cobas 6800 for the detection of a single positive sample within a pool of negative samples. RESULTS: Implementing the five-sample Dorfman pooling to test 1410 samples, we identified 42 (2.9%) individual SARS-CoV-2-positive samples and 27 (9.5%) positive pool samples. The pooling strategy precisely identified all the positive samples. All individually negative samples were also accurately determined by pooling. There was 100% sensitivity of detecting positive samples in a pool of negative samples even up to 1:64 dilution. There was a threefold increase in total throughput in one-third of the cost per day. CONCLUSION: A high-throughput platform such as Cobas 6800 can effectively increase the testing capacity by twofold to threefold by adopting the pooled testing strategy for successful management of SARS-CoV-2 and helping in the containment of community transmission.

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.

Clinical evaluation of a fully automated, laboratory-developed multiplex RT-PCR assay integrating dual-target SARS-CoV-2 and influenza A/B detection on a high-throughput platform.

Introduction. Laboratories worldwide are facing high demand for molecular testing during the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic, which might be further aggravated by the upcoming influenza season in the northern hemisphere.Gap Statement. Given that the symptoms of influenza are largely indistinguishable from those of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), both SARS-CoV-2 and the influenza viruses require concurrent testing by RT-PCR in patients presenting with symptoms of respiratory tract infection.Aim. We adapted and evaluated a laboratory-developed multiplex RT-PCR assay for simultaneous detection of SARS-CoV-2 (dual target), influenza A and influenza B (SC2/InflA/InflB-UCT) on a fully automated high-throughput system (cobas6800).Methodology. Analytical performance was assessed by serial dilution of quantified reference material and cell culture stocks in transport medium, including pretreatment for chemical inactivation. For clinical evaluation, residual portions of 164 predetermined patient samples containing SARS-CoV-2 (n=52), influenza A (n=43) or influenza B (n=19), as well as a set of negative samples, were subjected to the novel multiplex assay.Results. The assay demonstrated comparable analytical performance to currently available commercial tests, with limits of detection of 94.9 cp ml-1 for SARS-CoV-2, 14.6 cp ml-1 for influenza A and 422.3 cp ml-1 for influenza B. Clinical evaluation showed excellent agreement with the comparator assays (sensitivity of 98.1, 97.7 and 100 % for Sars-CoV-2 and influenza A and B, respectively).Conclusion. The SC2/InflA/InflB-UCT allows for efficient high-throughput testing for all three pathogens and thus provides streamlined diagnostics while conserving resources during the influenza season.

Comparison of SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR on a high-throughput molecular diagnostic platform and the cobas SARS-CoV-2 test for the diagnostic of COVID-19 on various clinical samples.

OBJECTIVES: In order to cope with the rapid spread of the COVID-19 pandemic, we introduced on our in-house high-throughput molecular diagnostic platform (MDx Platform) a real-time reverse transcriptase PCR (RT-PCR) to detect the SARS-CoV-2 from any clinical specimens. The aim of this study was to compare the RT-PCR results obtain with the MDx Platform and the commercial assay cobas SARS-CoV-2 (Roche) on nasopharyngeal swab and other clinical specimens including sputum, bronchial aspirate, bronchoalveolar lavage and anal swabs. METHODS: Samples received in our laboratory from patients suspected of COVID-19 (n = 262) were tested in parallel with our MDx platform SARS-CoV-2 PCR and with the cobas SARS-CoV-2 test. RESULTS: The overall agreement between the two tests for all samples tested was 99.24% (260/262), which corresponded to agreements of 100% (178/178) on nasopharyngeal swabs, 95.45% (42/44) on lower respiratory tract specimen with discordant resultS obtained for very high cycle threshold (Ct) value and 100% (40/40) on anorectal swabs. The Ct values for nasopharyngeal swabs displayed an excellent correlation (R2 > 96%) between both tests. CONCLUSIONS: The high agreements between the cobas SARS-CoV-2 test and the MDx platform supports the use of both methods for the diagnostic of COVID-19 on various clinical samples. Very few discrepant results may occur at very low viral load.

Pushing beyond specifications: Evaluation of linearity and clinical performance of the cobas 6800/8800 SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR assay for reliable quantification in blood and other materials outside recommendations.

BACKGROUND: The ongoing SARS-CoV-2 pandemic presents a unique challenge to diagnostic laboratories. There are preliminary studies correlating qRT-PCR results from different materials to clinical outcomes, yet, comparability is limited due to the plethora of different assays used for diagnostics. In this study we evaluate clinical performance and linear range for the SARS-CoV-2 IVD (cobas6800/8800 system, a fully automated sample-to-result platform) in different clinically relevant matrix materials outside official specifications. METHODS: Assay performance was assessed in human plasma, BAL/BL and transport medium following chemical inactivation. For analytical evaluation, respective matrix materials were spiked with SARS-CoV-2 RNA in ten-fold dilution series. The efficacy of chemical inactivation by guanidine hydrochloride solution was confirmed in cell culture infectivity experiments. For correlation, a total of 289 predetermined clinical samples including respiratory swabs, plasma and lower respiratory tract specimens were subjected to the SARS-CoV-2 IVD test and results were compared. RESULTS: The SARS-CoV-2 IVD showed excellent linearity over four to six log steps depending on matrix material. Chemical inactivation resulted in a reduction in plaque forming units of at least 3.5 log steps, while having no significant impact on assay performance. Inter-run consistency from three different testing sites demonstrated excellent comparability of RT-PCR results (maximum deviation was 1.53 CT). Clinical evaluation for respiratory swabs showed very good agreement with the comparator assay (Positive agreement 95.7 %, negative agreement 98.9 %). CONCLUSION: The SARS-CoV-2 IVD test for the cobas6800/8800 systems offers excellent linear range and inter-run consistency for quantification of SARS-CoV-2 RNA in different matrices outside official specifications.

Multicenter comparison of the Cobas 6800 system with the RealStar RT-PCR kit for the detection of SARS-CoV-2.

BACKGROUND: RT-PCR testing is crucial in the diagnostic of SARS-CoV-2 infection. The use of reliable and comparable PCR assays is a cornerstone to allow use of different PCR assays depending on the local equipment. In this work, we provide a comparison of the Cobas® (Roche) and the RealStar® assay (Altona). METHODS: Assessment of the two assays was performed prospectively in three reference Parisians hospitals, using 170 clinical samples. They were tested with the Cobas® assay, selected to obtain a distribution of cycle threshold (Ct) as large as possible, and tested with the RealStar assay with three largely available extraction platforms: QIAsymphony (Qiagen), MagNAPure (Roche) and NucliSENS-easyMag (BioMérieux). RESULTS: Overall, the agreement (positive for at least one gene) was 76 %. This rate differed considerably depending on the Cobas Ct values for gene E: below 35 (n = 91), the concordance was 99 %. Regarding the positive Ct values, linear regression analysis showed a coefficient of determination (R2) of 0.88 and the Deming regression line revealed a strong correlation with a slope of 1.023 and an intercept of -3.9. Bland-Altman analysis showed that the mean difference (Cobas® minus RealStar®) was + 3.3 Ct, with a SD of + 2.3 Ct. CONCLUSIONS: In this comparison, both RealStar® and Cobas® assays provided comparable qualitative results and a high correlation when both tests were positive. Discrepancies exist after 35 Ct and varied depending on the extraction system used for the RealStar® assay, probably due to a low viral load close to the detection limit of both assays.

Brief validation of the novel GeneXpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2 PCR assay.

The clinical and epidemiologic management of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic is critically dependent on molecular assays with short turn-around time. We validated the novel Xpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2 assay using a commercial nucleic acid testing (Roche Cobas 6800). We found an excellent concordance over a range of SARS-CoV-2 loads and across established human coronaviruses.

Clinical Evaluation of the cobas SARS-CoV-2 Test and a Diagnostic Platform Switch during 48 Hours in the Midst of the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Laboratories are currently witnessing extraordinary demand globally for sampling devices, reagents, consumables, and diagnostic instruments needed for timely diagnosis of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. To meet diagnostic needs as the pandemic grows, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recently granted several commercial SARS-CoV-2 tests Emergency Use Authorization (EUA), but manufacturer-independent evaluation data are scarce. We performed the first manufacturer-independent evaluation of the fully automated sample-to-result two-target test cobas 6800 SARS-CoV-2 (cobas) (Roche Molecular Systems, Branchburg, NJ), which received U.S. FDA EUA on 12 March 2020. The comparator was a standardized 3-h SARS-CoV-2 protocol, consisting of RNA extraction using an automated portable instrument, followed by a two-target reverse transcription real-time PCR (RT-PCR), which our laboratory has routinely used since January 2020 [V. M. Corman, O. Landt, M. Kaiser, R. Molenkamp, et al., Euro Surveill 25(3):pii=2000045, 2020, https://doi.org/10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2020.25.3.2000045]. cobas and the comparator showed overall agreement of 98.1% and a kappa value of 0.95 on an in-house validation panel consisting of 217 well-characterized retrospective samples. Immediate prospective head-to-head comparative evaluation followed on 502 samples, and the diagnostic approaches showed overall agreement of 99.6% and a kappa value of 0.98. A good correlation (r2 = 0.96) between cycle threshold values for SARS-CoV-2-specific targets obtained by cobas and the comparator was observed. Our results showed that cobas is a reliable assay for qualitative detection of SARS-CoV-2 in nasopharyngeal swab samples collected in the Universal Transport Medium System (UTM-RT) (Copan, Brescia, Italy). Under the extraordinary circumstances that laboratories are facing worldwide, a safe diagnostic platform switch is feasible in only 48 h and in the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic if carefully planned and executed.