CBPH assay for the highest sensitive detection of SARS-COV-2 in the semen.

BACKGROUND: Great concerns have been raised on SARS-CoV-2 impact on men's andrological well-being, and many studies have attempted to determine whether SARS-CoV-2 is present in the semen and till now the data are unclear and somehow ambiguous. However, these studies used quantitative real-time (qRT) PCR, which is not sufficiently sensitive to detect nucleic acids in clinical samples with a low viral load. METHODS: The clinical performance of various nucleic acid detection methods (qRT-PCR, OSN-qRT-PCR, cd-PCR, and CBPH) was assessed for SARS-CoV-2 using 236 clinical samples from laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 cases. Then, the presence of SARS-CoV-2 in the semen of 12 recovering patients was investigated using qRT-PCR, OSN-qRT-PCR, cd-PCR, and CBPH in parallel using 24 paired semen, blood, throat swab, and urine samples. RESULTS: The sensitivity and specificity along with AUC of CBPH was markedly higher than the other 3methods. Although qRT-PCR, OSN-qRT-PCR and cdPCR detected no SARS-CoV-2 RNA in throat swab, blood, urine, and semen samples of the 12 patients, CBPH detected the presence of SARS-CoV-2 genome fragments in semen samples, but not in paired urine samples, of 3 of 12 patients. The existing SARS-CoV-2 genome fragments were metabolized over time. CONCLUSIONS: Both OSN-qRT-PCR and cdPCR had better performance than qRT-PCR, and CBPH had the highest diagnostic performance in detecting SARS-CoV-2, which contributed the most improvement to the determination of the critical value in gray area samples with low vrial load, which then provides a rational screening strategy for studying the clearance of coronavirus in the semen over time in patients recovering from COVID-19. Although the presence of SARS-CoV-2 fragments in the semen was demonstrated by CBPH, COVID-19 is unlikely to be sexually transmitted from male partners for at least 3 months after hospital discharge.

Evaluation of the AdvanSure One-Stop COVID-19 Plus Kit for SARS-CoV-2 Detection Using a Streamlined RNA Extraction Method.

Real-time reverse transcription (rRT)-PCR, which is the reference standard for the diagnosis of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection, generally involves a time-consuming and costly RNA extraction step prior to amplification. We evaluated the performance of the AdvanSure One-Stop COVID-19 Plus Kit (LG Chem, Seoul, Korea), a novel rRT-PCR assay that can detect SARS-CoV-2 within 90 minutes using a streamlined RNA extraction method. In total, 509 nasopharyngeal swab (NPS) specimens (SARS-CoV-2 positive: N=205; SARS-CoV-2 negative: N=304) previously tested using the PowerChek SARS-CoV-2 Real-time PCR Kit (Kogene Biotech, Seoul, Korea) were tested using the AdvanSure assay. The limit of detection (LOD) of the AdvanSure assay was determined using serially diluted inactivated SARS-CoV-2. The positive and negative percent agreements between the AdvanSure and PowerChek assays were 99.5% (204/205) and 99.3% (302/304), respectively. The LODs of the AdvanSure assay for SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid and spike/RNA-dependent RNA polymerase genes were 672 and 846 copies/mL, respectively. The results show that the performance of the AdvanSure assay is comparable to that of the PowerChek assay used for routine SARS-CoV-2 testing, suggesting that the AdvanSure assay is a useful diagnostic tool for rapid and accurate detection of SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Droplet digital recombinase polymerase amplification for multiplexed detection of human coronavirus.

Since the outbreak of coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19), detection technologies have been attracting a great deal of attention in molecular diagnosis applications. In particular, the droplet digital PCR (ddPCR) has become a promising tool as it offers absolute quantification of target nucleic acids with high specificity and sensitivity. In recent years, the combination of the isothermal amplification strategies has made ddPCR a popular method for on-site testing by enabling amplification at a constant temperature. However, the current isothermal ddPCR assays are still challenging due to inherent non-specific amplification. In this paper, we present a multiplexed droplet digital recombinase polymerase amplification (MddRPA) with precise initiation of the reaction. First, the reaction temperature and dynamic range of reverse transcription (RT) and RPA were characterized by real-time monitoring of fluorescence intensities. Using a droplet-based microfluidic chip, the master mix and the initiator were fractionated and rapidly mixed within well-confined droplets. Due to the high heat transfer and mass transfer of the droplets, the precise initiation of the amplification was enabled and the entire assay could be conducted within 30 min. The concentrations of target RNA in the range from 5 copies per µL to 2500 copies per µL could be detected with high linearity (R2 > 0.999). Furthermore, the multiplexed detection of three types of human coronaviruses was successfully demonstrated with high specificity (>96%). Finally, we compared the performance of the assay with a commercial RT-qPCR system using COVID-19 clinical samples. The MddRPA assay showed a 100% concordance with the RT-qPCR results, indicating its reliability and accuracy in detecting SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acids in clinical samples. Therefore, our MddRPA assay with rapid detection, precise quantification, and multiplexing capability would be an interesting method for molecular diagnosis of viral infections.

Current methods for diagnosis of human coronaviruses: pros and cons.

The current global fight against coronavirus disease (COVID-19) to flatten the transmission curve is put forth by the World Health Organization (WHO) as there is no immediate diagnosis or cure for COVID-19 so far. In order to stop the spread, researchers worldwide are working around the clock aiming to develop reliable tools for early diagnosis of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS-CoV-2) understanding the infection path and mechanisms. Currently, nucleic acid-based molecular diagnosis (real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) test) is considered the gold standard for early diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2. Antibody-based serology detection is ineffective for the purpose of early diagnosis, but a potential tool for serosurveys, providing people with immune certificates for clearance from COVID-19 infection. Meanwhile, there are various blooming methods developed these days. In this review, we summarise different types of coronavirus discovered which can be transmitted between human beings. Methods used for diagnosis of the discovered human coronavirus (SARS, MERS, COVID-19) including nucleic acid detection, gene sequencing, antibody detection, antigen detection, and clinical diagnosis are presented. Their merits, demerits and prospects are discussed which can help the researchers to develop new generation of advanced diagnostic tools for accurate and effective control of human coronavirus transmission in the communities and hospitals.

[Establishment and preliminary application of quantitative real-time PCR assay for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 subgenomic nucleocapsid RNA].

Objective: To establish a rapid and specific quantitative real-time PCR (qPCR) method for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 subgenomic nucleocapsid RNA (SgN) in patients with COVID-19 or environmental samples. Methods: The qPCR assay was established by designing specific primers and TaqMan probe based on the SARS-CoV-2 genomic sequence in Global Initiative of Sharing All Influenza Data (GISAID) database. The reaction conditions were optimized by using different annealing temperature, different primers and probe concentrations and the standard curve was established. Further, the specificity, sensitivity and repeatability were also assessed. The established SgN and genomic RNA (gRNA) qPCR assays were both applied to detect 21 environmental samples and 351 clinical samples containing 48 recovered patients. In the specimens with both positive gRNA and positive SgN, 25 specimens were inoculated on cells. Results: The primers and probes of SgN had good specificity for SARS-CoV-2. The minimum detection limit of the preliminarily established qPCR detection method for SgN was 1.5×102 copies/ml, with a coefficient of variation less than 1%. The positive rate of gRNA in 372 samples was 97.04% (361/372). The positive rates of SgN in positive environmental samples and positive clinical samples were 36.84% (7/19) and 49.42% (169/342), respectively. The positive rate and copy number of SgN in Wild strain were lower than those of SARS-CoV-2 Delta strain. Among the 25 SgN positive samples, 12 samples within 5 days of sampling time were all isolated with virus; 13 samples sampled for more than 12 days had no cytopathic effect. Conclusion: A qPCR method for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 SgN has been successfully established. The sensitivity, specificity and repeatability of this method are good.

Reducing COVID-19 diagnostic errors with dNTPαSe supplementation.

Timely and accurate diagnosis of COVID-19 is critical for controlling the pandemic. As the standard method to diagnose SARS-CoV-2, the real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR) has good convenience. However, RT-qPCR still has a relatively high false-negative rate, particularly in the case of detecting low viral loads. In this study, using selenium-modified nucleoside triphosphates (dNTPαSe) in the RT-PCR reactions, we successfully increased the detection sensitivity and reduced the false-negative rate in COVID-19 diagnosis. By detecting positive controls, pseudovirus, and clinical samples with the commercial kits, we found that the dNTPαSe supplementation to these kits could generally offer smaller Ct values, permit the viral detection even in single-digit copies, and increase the detection specificity, sensitivity, and accuracy, thereby reducing the false-negative rate. Our experimental results demonstrated that dNTPαSe supplementation can make the commercial kits more specific, sensitive, and accurate, and this method is a convenient and efficient strategy for the disease detection and diagnosis.

Examination of the utility of the COVID-19 detection kit, TRC Ready® SARS-CoV-2 i for nasopharyngeal swabs.

The reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) offers high sensitivity, but has some drawbacks, such as the time required for the RNA extraction. Transcription reverse-transcription concerted reaction (TRC) Ready® SARS-CoV-2 i is easy to use and can be performed in about 40 minutes. TRC Ready® SARS-CoV-2 i and real-time one-step RT-PCR using the TaqMan probe tests of cryopreserved nasopharyngeal swab samples from patients diagnosed with COVID-19 were compared. The primary objective was to examine the positive and negative concordance rates. A total of 69 samples cryopreserved at -80° C were examined. Of the 37 frozen samples that were expected to be RT-PCR positive, 35 were positive by the RT-PCR method. TRC Ready® SARS-CoV-2 i detected 33 positive cases and 2 negative cases. One frozen sample that was expected to be RT-PCR positive was negative on both TRC Ready® SARS-CoV-2 i and RT-PCR. In addition, one frozen sample that was expected to be RT-PCR positive was positive by the RT-PCR method and negative by TRC Ready® SARS-CoV-2 i. Of the 32 frozen samples that were expected to be RT-PCR negative, both the RT-PCR method and TRC Ready® SARS-CoV-2 i yielded negative results for all 32 samples. Compared with RT-PCR, TRC Ready® SARS-CoV-2 i had a positive concordance rate of 94.3% and a negative concordance rate of 97.1%. TRC Ready® SARS-CoV-2 i can be utilized in a wide range of medical sites such as clinics and community hospitals due to its ease of operability, and is expected to be useful in infection control.

Robust and Precise Quantitative Real-Time Polymerase Chain Reaction with an Amplification Efficiency-Aware Reaction Kinetics Model.

Quantitative real-time PCR (qPCR) is a method extensively used in nucleic acid testing for plants and animals. During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, high-precision qPCR analysis was urgently needed since quantitative results obtained from conventional qPCR methods were not accurate and precise, causing misdiagnoses and high rates of false-negative. To achieve more accurate results, we propose a new qPCR data analysis method with an amplification efficiency-aware reaction kinetics model (AERKM). Our reaction kinetics model (RKM) mathematically describes the tendency of the amplification efficiency during the whole qPCR process inferred by biochemical reaction dynamics. Amplification efficiency (AE) was introduced to rectify the fitted data so as to match the real reaction process for individual tests, thus reducing errors. The 5-point 10-fold gradient qPCR tests of 63 genes have been verified. The results of a 0.9% slope bias and an 8.2% ratio bias using AERKM exceed 4.1 and 39.4%, respectively, of the best performance of existing models, which demonstrates higher precision, less fluctuation, and better robustness among different nucleic acids. AERKM also provides a better understanding of the real qPCR process and gives insights into the detection, treatment, and prevention of severe diseases.

Evaluating real-world data in COVID-19 antigen and PCR testing.

OBJECTIVE: COVID-19 testing is an important pillar in fighting the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Even though billions of tests have been conducted, little is known on performance of testing sites. This is a retrospective observational study with real-world data from a pharmacist-led COVID-19 testing center in Germany during the Omicron subvariant BA.4 and BA.5 wave in June 2022. MATERIALS: The rapid antigen tests employed were purchased from Anbio Biotechnology (Xiamen, China). The RT-PCR was performed on Egens YS-qPCR-1 real-time system with Kewei multiple real-time PCR kits for detection of SARS-CoV-2 (Beijing Kewei Clinical Diagnostic Reagent Inc., Beijing, China). METHODS: The study followed the STARD 2015 guideline. In this retrospective cohort study, the performance of testing sites was compared. RESULTS: During the study period, 7,112 patients were tested by rapid antigen tests and 1,025 RT-PCR tests conducted. Included were 233 patients who were referred by other testing sites for confirmation of positive results. A positive predictive value of 99.6% was calculated for the antigen tests in the pharmacist-led testing center. Referred positive patients from non-medical sites were antigen and RT-PCR negative in 16 cases, which led to a positive predictive value of 88.8%. Difference between site performance was statistically significant (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Results indicate that nucleic acid amplification confirmation is crucial in the context of the current testing strategy in Germany. Higher standards in antigen-testing, however, can make nucleic acid amplification in active COVID-19 infections unnecessary and testing cost efficient. This study provides the first data in the world on COVID-19 testing performance, and how it can be optimized.

Rapid differential diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2, influenza A/B and respiratory syncytial viruses: Validation of a novel RT-PCR assay.

BACKGROUND: Influenza and respiratory syncytial (RSV) viruses are expected to co-circulate with SARS-CoV-2 in the upcoming seasons and clinical differential diagnosis between them is difficult. Laboratory-based RT-PCR is a gold standard diagnostic method for influenza, RSV and SARS-CoV-2. The objective of this study was to estimate the diagnostic performance of a novel point-of-care RT-PCR assay STANDARD M10 Flu/RSV/SARS-CoV-2 (SD Biosensor) in a large number of clinical specimens with diversified (co)-infection patterns and viral loads. METHODS: This was a retrospective study, in which all samples were tested in both STANDARD M10 Flu/RSV/SARS-CoV-2 index and Allplex SARS-CoV-2/Respiratory Panel 1 (Seegene) reference kits. Samples with discordant results were further processed in a third resolver test (Resp-4-Plex, Abbott). RESULTS: A total of 1,019 naso-/oropharyngeal samples (50.3% positive for at least one virus) were processed in both STANDARD M10 Flu/RSV/SARS-CoV-2 and Allplex assays and the overall between-assay agreement was as high as 94.6%. Positive percent agreement of the STANDARD M10 Flu/RSV/SARS-CoV-2 was 100%, 96.6%, 97.3% and 99.4% for influenza A, B, RSV and SARS-CoV-2, respectively. The corresponding negative percent agreement was 99.7%. 100%, 100% and 98.4%, respectively. The expected positive and negative predictive values for all viruses were constantly above 96% in a reasonable range of disease prevalence. CONCLUSIONS: STANDARD M10 Flu/RSV/SARS-CoV-2 is a reliable RT-PCR assay able to detect influenza A, influenza B, RSV and SARS-CoV-2 in one hour or less, fostering a rapid differential diagnosis of common respiratory viruses.

Development of multiplex RT-ddPCR assays for detection of SARS-CoV-2 and other common respiratory virus infections.

BACKGROUND: Measures for mitigation of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) were set to reduce the spread of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). SARS-CoV-2 and other respiratory viruses share similar transmission routes and some common clinical manifestations. Co-circulation of SARS-CoV-2 and other common respiratory viruses is imminent. Therefore, development of multiplex assays for detecting these respiratory viruses is essential for being prepared for future outbreaks of respiratory viruses. METHODS: A panel of three reverse transcription droplet digital PCR (RT-ddPCR) assays were developed to detect 15 different human respiratory viruses. Evaluations of its performance were demonstrated. A total of 100 local and 98 imported COVID-19 cases in Hong Kong were screened for co-infection with other common respiratory viruses. RESULTS: All detected viral targets showed distinct signal clusters using the multiplex RT-ddPCR assays. These assays have a broad range of linearity and good intra-/inter-assay reproducibility for each target. The lower limits of quantification for all targets were ≤46 copies per reaction. Six imported cases of COVID-19 were found to be co-infected with other respiratory viruses, whereas no local case of co-infection was observed. CONCLUSIONS: The multiplex RT-ddPCR assays were demonstrated to be useful for screening of respiratory virus co-infections. The strict preventive measures applied in Hong Kong may be effective in limiting the circulation of other human respiratory viruses. The multiplex assays developed in this study can achieve a robust detection method for clinical and research purposes.

Advances in droplet digital polymerase chain reaction on microfluidic chips.

The PCR technique has been known to the general public since the pandemic outbreak of COVID-19. This technique has progressed through three stages: from simple PCR to real-time fluorescence PCR to digital PCR. Among them, the microfluidic-based droplet digital PCR technique has attracted much attention and has been widely applied due to its advantages of high throughput, high sensitivity, low reagent consumption, low cross-contamination, and absolute quantification ability. In this review, we introduce various designs of microfluidic-based ddPCR developed within the last decade. The microfluidic-based droplet generation methods, thermal cycle strategies, and signal counting approaches are described, and the applications in the fields of single-cell analysis, disease diagnosis, and pathogen detection are introduced. Further, the challenges and prospects of microfluidic-based ddPCR are discussed. We hope that this review can contribute to the further development of the microfluidic-based ddPCR technique.

Evaluation of a high-sensitivity SARS-CoV-2 antigen test on the fully automated light-initiated chemiluminescent immunoassay platform.

OBJECTIVES: To describe a high-sensitivity SARS-CoV-2 antigen test that is based on the fully automated light-initiated chemiluminescent immunoassay (LiCA®), and to validate its analytical characteristics and clinical agreement on detecting SARS-CoV-2 infection against the reference molecular test. METHODS: Analytical performance was validated and detection limits were determined using different types of nucleocapsid protein samples. 798-pair anterior nasal swab specimens were collected from hospitalized patients and asymptomatic screening individuals. Agreement between LiCA® antigen and real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR) was evaluated. RESULTS: Repeatability and within-lab precision were 1.6-2.3%. The C5∼C95 interval was -5.1-4.6% away from C50. Detection limits in average (SD) were 325 (±141) U/mL on the national reference panel, 0.07 (±0.04) TCID50/mL on active viral cultures, 0.27 (±0.09) pg/mL on recombinant nucleocapsid proteins and 1.07 (±1.01) TCID50/mL on inactivated viral suspensions, respectively. LiCA detected a median of 374-fold (IQR 137-643) lower levels of the viral antigen than comparative rapid tests. As reference to the rRT-PCR method, overall sensitivity and specificity were determined to be 97.5% (91.4-99.7%) and 99.9% (99.2-100%), respectively. Total agreement between both methods was 99.6% (98.7-99.9%) with Cohen's kappa 0.98 (0.96-1). A positive detection rate of 100% (95.4-100%) was obtained as Ct≤37.8. CONCLUSIONS: The LiCA® system provides an exceptionally high-sensitivity and fully automated platform for the detection of the SARS-CoV-2 antigen in nasal swabs. The assay may have high potential use for large-scale population screening and surveillance of COVID-19 as an alternative to the rRT-PCR test.

Validation of the efficacy of air purifiers using molecular techniques.

The importance of air purifiers has increased in recent years, especially with the "coronavirus disease 2019" pandemic. The efficacy of air purifiers is usually determined under laboratory conditions before widespread application. The standard procedure for testing depends on virus cultivation and titration on cell culture. This, however, requires several days to deliver results. The aim of this study was to establish a rapid molecular assay which can differentiate between intact infectious and distorted non-infectious virus particles. Feline Coronavirus was selected as model for screening. First the samples were pretreated with enzymes (universal nuclease and RNase cocktail enzyme mixture) or viability dye (propidium monoazide) to eliminate any free nucleic acids. The ribonucleic acid (RNA) from intact virus was released via magnetic beads-based extraction, then the amount of the RNA was determined using real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) or reverse transcription recombinase-aided amplification (RT-RAA). All results were compared to the infectivity assay based on the calculation of the 50% tissue culture infectious dose (TCID50). The nuclease has eliminated 100% of the free Feline Coronavirus RNA, while propidium monoazide underperformed (2.3-fold decrease in free RNA). Both RT-RAA and real-time RT-PCR produced similar results to the infectivity assay on cell culture with limit of detection of 102 TCID50/mL. Two UV-C air purifiers with prosperities of 100% inactivation of the viruses were used to validate the established procedure. Both real-time RT-PCR and RT-RAA were able to differentiate between intact virus particles and free RNA. To conclude, this study revealed a promising rapid method to validate the efficacy of air purifiers by combining enzymatic pretreatment and molecular assays.

Performance and Cost-effectiveness of Pooling COVID-19 Samples Using Real time Polymerase Chain Reaction Test.

BACKGROUND: Rapid detection of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Corona Virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) by real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) is the most reliable method used worldwide. Although the incidence of the disease has increased globally, the limited availability of PCR kits has become the major bottleneck for the diagnosis of COVID positive patients. METHODS: Random samples were pooled for two months in group of two-five and tested for SARS-CoV-2. If the pool was negative, all individuals in the pool were reported negative. If the pool was positive, then the individual samples were retested to identify the positive individual. RESULTS: The mean cycle threshold (Ct) value of pooled samples was not significantly different with that of individual samples for N, ORF-1ab and E genes. Also, pooling saved more than 60% of reagents, time and effort, workforce and cost. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, the positivity rate was around 5% and saving of reagent, cost, time and manpower was more than 60%.

Real-Time Polymerase Chain Reaction: Current Techniques, Applications, and Role in COVID-19 Diagnosis.

Successful detection of the first SARS-CoV-2 cases using the real-time polymerase chain reaction (real-time PCR) method reflects the power and usefulness of this technique. Real-time PCR is a variation of the PCR assay to allow monitoring of the PCR progress in actual time. PCR itself is a molecular process used to enzymatically synthesize copies in multiple amounts of a selected DNA region for various purposes. Real-time PCR is currently one of the most powerful molecular approaches and is widely used in biological sciences and medicine because it is quantitative, accurate, sensitive, and rapid. Current applications of real-time PCR include gene expression analysis, mutation detection, detection and quantification of pathogens, detection of genetically modified organisms, detection of allergens, monitoring of microbial degradation, species identification, and determination of parasite fitness. The technique has been used as a gold standard for COVID-19 diagnosis. Modifications of the standard real-time PCR methods have also been developed for particular applications. This review aims to provide an overview of the current applications of the real-time PCR technique, including its role in detecting emerging viruses such as SARS-CoV-2.

Comparison of the performance of two real-time fluorescent quantitative PCR kits for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid: a study based on large real clinical samples.

BACKGROUND: The global pandemic of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has led to the development of multiple detection kits by national manufacturers for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 viral nucleic acid testing. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the performance of different kits (i.e., Maccura kit and Sansure kit) in real clinical work using clinical samples, which will help with the optimization of the test kits. METHOD: During the past three months (March-May 2022), 1399 pharyngeal swabs from suspected COVID-19 patients have been initially screened using the Maccura kit in Jilin, China, and the test results were verified using the Sansure kit. The cycle threshold (Ct) values generated by the two kits were compared at different viral load levels. Correlation and consistency of the Ct values were investigated using Spearman correlation, Deming regression, and Bland-Altman plots. The cut-off Ct values of the Maccura kit were recalculated by referencing the result of the Sansure kit as a standard. Furthermore, another 163 pharyngeal swabs from suspected COVID-19 patients were collected to verify the new cut-off values. RESULTS: As a result of the Maccura kit testing, 1192 positive cases and 207 suspected COVID-19 cases were verified. After re-examination by the Sansure kit, 1118 positive cases were confirmed. The difference between the Ct values provided by the two kits was statistically significant, except for the N gene at high viral load. The Ct values obtained from the two kits presented a linear positive correlation. The Maccura kit used new cut-off Ct values of 35.00 (ORF1ab gene) and 35.07 (N gene). Based on that, the validation pass rate for the new cut-off Ct values was 91.41%. CONCLUSION: Since the Maccura kit is found to have false positives in actual clinical work, recalculation of the cut-off values can reduce this occurrence. In order to improve the accuracy of the testing, laboratories should use two kits for COVID-19 testing, and the adjusting and optimizing of the kits for their situation are needed.

Practical considerations to establish a validated platform for pooled detection of SARS-CoV-2 by droplet digital PCR.

Detection of SARS-CoV-2 has created an enormous workload for laboratories worldwide resulting in a restriction at the time of massive testing. Pool testing is a strategy that reduces time and costs. However, beyond the detection of infectious diseases in blood banks, this approach is rarely implemented in routine laboratories. Therefore, what was learned from the SARS-CoV-2 pool testing should represent an opportunity to increase diagnostic capabilities. The present work, carried out in the context of a diagnostic laboratory of a public hospital during the COVID-19 pandemic, represents a contribution to this end. The main limitation of pool testing is the risk of false negatives that could have been identified by individual tests. These limitations are the dilution of samples with a low virus load during pooling and that the integrity of the sample may be affected by the quality of the sample collection. Fortunately, both limitations coincide with the main strengths of droplet digital PCR (ddPCR). ddPCR is a third-generation PCR that splits the amplification into thousands of droplets that work in parallel, increasing sensitivity and resistance to inhibitors. Therefore, ddPCR is particularly useful for pool testing. Here we show how to factor between test sensitivity and savings in test time and resources. We have identified and optimized critical parameters for pool testing. The present study, which analyzed 1000 nasopharyngeal samples, showed that the pool testing could detect even a single positive sample with a CT value of up to 30 in pools of 34 samples. This test was performed using three different standard extraction methods, the simplest being heating only, which resulted in substantial savings of extraction reagents in addition to PCR reagents. Moreover, we show that pooling can be extended to use saliva, which is less invasive and allows self-collection, reducing the risk for health personnel.

SARS-CoV-2 RNA Testing Using Different Assays-Impact on Testing Strategies in a Clinical Setting.

In order to assess SARS-CoV-2 real time quantitative polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR) results in a real-life setting, three independent laboratories in Graz (Austria) set up a continuous cross comparison schedule. The following test systems were used: The QIAGEN NeuMoDx SARS-CoV-2 Assay, the Allplex™ 2019-nCoV Assay (Seegene) on a MicroLab Nimbus (Hamilton) platform combined with RealStar SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR Assay (Altona Diagnostics GmbH), and the cobas SARS-CoV-2 test on a fully automated cobas 6800 system (Roche). A total of 200 samples were analysed, 184 (92%) were found to be concordant with all testing platforms, 14 (7%) discordant. Two (1%) samples tested invalid on a single platform and were excluded from further analysis. Discordant results were distributed randomly across the assays. The Ct values from all assays correlated closely with each other. All discordant samples showed Ct values ≥ 26. SARS-CoV-2 RT-qPCR assays may show considerable variability, especially in samples with low viral RNA concentrations. Decision makers should thus balance the advantages and disadvantages of RT-qPCR for mass screening and adopt suitable strategies that ensure a rational management of positive samples with high Ct values.

Real-Time fast PCR amplification using designated and conventional real time thermal cycler systems: COVID-19 perspective.

The study aimed to shorten multiplex RT-PCR run time for detection of SARS CoV-2 N1 and N2 sequences and human RNase P (RP) sequence as internal mRNA control using conventional and designated real time thermal cycler systems. Optimization of Fast PCR protocol using plasmid-based N1 and N2 positive control and synthetic version of human RP was done on Applied Biosystems (ABI) QuantStudioTM5 (conventional), ABI 7500 Fast Dx (designated), and CFX96 Touch Real Time Detection System, Bio-Rad (conventional). Finally, a performance evaluation of Fast PCR was performed in terms of sensitivity, specificity, and precision. For a 40-cycle PCR with optimized Fast PCR protocols on QuantStudioTM5, ABI 7500 Fast Dx, and CFX96 Touch (conventional), standard/regular versus Fast PCR run times (min) were 84 vs. 49, 96 vs. 48, and 103 vs. 61, thereby saving 35, 48, and 43 min, respectively. For each thermal cycler, Standard and Fast PCR generated identical shapes of fluorescence curves, Ct values, and (3) R2 (0.95 to 0.99) for 5 10-log dilution panels of each positive control. The fast PCR approach generated results with 100% sensitivity and specificity. Median test comparisons between standard PCR and Fast PCR Cts of COVID-19 samples did not produce significance (p>0.5), suggesting that Fast PCR and Standard PCR were comparable. Also, the median and mean of each target had closely-related values, further suggesting that the two approaches were comparable. That is, there is an equivalency between Conventional and Fast PCR instruments for detection of COVID-19.