Comparison of the methods for isolation and detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA in municipal wastewater.

Introduction: Coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 is a causative agent responsible for the current global pandemic situation known as COVID-19. Clinical manifestations of COVID-19 include a wide range of symptoms from mild (i.e., cough, fever, dyspnea) to severe pneumonia-like respiratory symptoms. SARS-CoV-2 has been demonstrated to be detectable in the stool of COVID-19 patients. Waste-based epidemiology (WBE) has been shown as a promising approach for early detection and monitoring of SARS-CoV-2 in the local population performed via collection, isolation, and detection of viral pathogens from environmental sources. Methods: In order to select the optimal protocol for monitoring the COVID-19 epidemiological situation in region Turiec, Slovakia, we (1) compared methods for SARS-CoV-2 separation and isolation, including virus precipitation by polyethylene glycol (PEG), virus purification via ultrafiltration (Vivaspin®) and subsequent isolation by NucleoSpin RNA Virus kit (Macherey-Nagel), and direct isolation from wastewater (Zymo Environ Water RNA Kit); (2) evaluated the impact of water freezing on SARS- CoV-2 separation, isolation, and detection; (3) evaluated the role of wastewater filtration on virus stability; and (4) determined appropriate methods including reverse transcription-droplet digital PCR (RT-ddPCR) and real-time quantitative polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR) (targeting the same genes, i.e., RdRp and gene E) for quantitative detection of SARS-CoV-2 in wastewater samples. Results: (1) Usage of Zymo Environ Water RNA Kit provided superior quality of isolated RNA in comparison with both ultracentrifugation and PEG precipitation. (2) Freezing of wastewater samples significantly reduces the RNA yield. (3) Filtering is counterproductive when Zymo Environ Water RNA Kit is used. (4) According to the specificity and sensitivity, the RT-ddPCR outperforms RT-qPCR. Discussion: The results of our study suggest that WBE is a valuable early warning alert and represents a non-invasive approach to monitor viral pathogens, thus protects public health on a regional and national level. In addition, we have shown that the sensitivity of testing the samples with a nearer detection limit can be improved by selecting the appropriate combination of enrichment, isolation, and detection methods.

Comparison of Digital PCR and Quantitative PCR with Various SARS-CoV-2 Primer-Probe Sets.

The World Health Organization (WHO) has declared the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) as an international health emergency. Current diagnostic tests are based on the reverse transcription-quantitative polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR) method, which is the gold standard test that involves the amplification of viral RNA. However, the RT-qPCR assay has limitations in terms of sensitivity and quantification. In this study, we tested both qPCR and droplet digital PCR (ddPCR) to detect low amounts of viral RNA. The cycle threshold (CT) of the viral RNA by RT-PCR significantly varied according to the sequences of the primer and probe sets with in vitro transcript (IVT) RNA or viral RNA as templates, whereas the copy number of the viral RNA by ddPCR was effectively quantified with IVT RNA, cultured viral RNA, and RNA from clinical samples. Furthermore, the clinical samples were assayed via both methods, and the sensitivity of the ddPCR was determined to be equal to or more than that of the RT-qPCR. However, the ddPCR assay is more suitable for determining the copy number of reference materials. These findings suggest that the qPCR assay with the ddPCR defined reference materials could be used as a highly sensitive and compatible diagnostic method for viral RNA detection.