SwabExpress: An End-to-End Protocol for Extraction-Free COVID-19 Testing.

BACKGROUND: The urgent need for massively scaled clinical testing for SARS-CoV-2, along with global shortages of critical reagents and supplies, has necessitated development of streamlined laboratory testing protocols. Conventional nucleic acid testing for SARS-CoV-2 involves collection of a clinical specimen with a nasopharyngeal swab in transport medium, nucleic acid extraction, and quantitative reverse-transcription PCR (RT-qPCR). As testing has scaled across the world, the global supply chain has buckled, rendering testing reagents and materials scarce. To address shortages, we developed SwabExpress, an end-to-end protocol developed to employ mass produced anterior nares swabs and bypass the requirement for transport media and nucleic acid extraction. METHODS: We evaluated anterior nares swabs, transported dry and eluted in low-TE buffer as a direct-to-RT-qPCR alternative to extraction-dependent viral transport media. We validated our protocol of using heat treatment for viral inactivation and added a proteinase K digestion step to reduce amplification interference. We tested this protocol across archived and prospectively collected swab specimens to fine-tune test performance. RESULTS: After optimization, SwabExpress has a low limit of detection at 2-4 molecules/µL, 100% sensitivity, and 99.4% specificity when compared side by side with a traditional RT-qPCR protocol employing extraction. On real-world specimens, SwabExpress outperforms an automated extraction system while simultaneously reducing cost and hands-on time. CONCLUSION: SwabExpress is a simplified workflow that facilitates scaled testing for COVID-19 without sacrificing test performance. It may serve as a template for the simplification of PCR-based clinical laboratory tests, particularly in times of critical shortages during pandemics.

Evaluation of SARS-CoV-2 isolation in cell culture from nasal/nasopharyngeal swabs or saliva specimens of patients with COVID-19.

It has been revealed that SARS-CoV-2 can be efficiently isolated from clinical specimens such as nasal/nasopharyngeal swabs or saliva in cultured cells. In this study, we examined the efficiency of viral isolation including SARS-CoV-2 mutant strains between nasal/nasopharyngeal swab or saliva specimens. Furthermore, we also examined the comparison of viral isolation rates by sample species using simulated specimens for COVID-19. As a result, it was found that the isolation efficiency of SARS-CoV-2 in the saliva specimens was significantly lower than that in the nasal/nasopharyngeal swab specimens. In order to determine which component of saliva is responsible for the lower isolation rate of saliva specimens, we tested the abilities of lactoferrin, amylase, cathelicidin, and mucin, which are considered to be abundant in saliva, to inhibit the infection of SARS-CoV-2 pseudotyped viruses (SARS-CoV-2pv). Lactoferrin and amylase were found to inhibit SARS-CoV-2pv infection. In conclusion, even if the same number of viral genome copies was detected by the real-time RT-PCR test, infection of SARS-CoV-2 present in saliva is thought to be inhibited by inhibitory factors such as lactoferrin and amylase, compared to nasal/nasopharyngeal swab specimens.

Standardization of in-house anti-IgG and IgA ELISAs for the detection of COVID-19.

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is the causative agent of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). RT-PCR detection of viral RNA represents the gold standard method for diagnosis of COVID-19. However, multiple diagnostic tests are needed for acute disease diagnosis and assessing immunity during the COVID-19 outbreak. Here, we developed in-house anti-RBD IgG and IgA enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISAs) using a well-defined serum sample panel for screening and identification of human SARS-CoV-2 infection. We found that our in-house anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG ELISA displayed a 93.5% sensitivity and 98.8% specificity whereas our in-house anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgA ELISA provided assay sensitivity and specificity at 89.5% and 99.4%, respectively. The agreement kappa values of our in-house anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG and IgA ELISA assays were deemed to be excellent and fair, respectively, when compared to RT-PCR and excellent for both assays when compared to Euroimmun anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG and IgA ELISAs. These data indicate that our in-house anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG and IgA ELISAs are compatible performing assays for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Impedimetric Sensing: An Emerging Tool for Combating the COVID-19 Pandemic.

The COVID-19 pandemic revealed a pressing need for the development of sensitive and low-cost point-of-care sensors for disease diagnosis. The current standard of care for COVID-19 is quantitative reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (qRT-PCR). This method is sensitive, but takes time, effort, and requires specialized equipment and reagents to be performed correctly. This make it unsuitable for widespread, rapid testing and causes poor individual and policy decision-making. Rapid antigen tests (RATs) are a widely used alternative that provide results quickly but have low sensitivity and are prone to false negatives, particularly in cases with lower viral burden. Electrochemical sensors have shown much promise in filling this technology gap, and impedance spectroscopy specifically has exciting potential in rapid screening of COVID-19. Due to the data-rich nature of impedance measurements performed at different frequencies, this method lends itself to machine-leaning (ML) algorithms for further data processing. This review summarizes the current state of impedance spectroscopy-based point-of-care sensors for the detection of the SARS-CoV-2 virus. This article also suggests future directions to address the technology's current limitations to move forward in this current pandemic and prepare for future outbreaks.

Rapid and Sensitive Diagnosis of COVID-19 Using an Electricity-Free Self-Testing System.

Rapid and sensitive detection of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is essential for early diagnosis and effective treatment. Nucleic acid testing has been considered the gold standard method for the diagnosis of COVID-19 for its high sensitivity and specificity. However, the polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-based method in the central lab requires expensive equipment and well-trained personnel, which makes it difficult to be used in resource-limited settings. It highlights the need for a sensitive and simple assay that allows potential patients to detect SARS-CoV-2 by themselves. Here, we developed an electricity-free self-testing system based on reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) that allows for rapid and accurate detection of SARS-CoV-2. Our system employs a heating bag as the heat source, and a 3D-printed box filled with phase change material (PCM) that successfully regulates the temperature for the RT-LAMP. The colorimetric method could be completed in 40 min and the results could be read out by the naked eye. A ratiometric measurement for exact readout was also incorporated to improve the detection accuracy of the system. This self-testing system is a promising tool for point-of-care testing (POCT) that enables rapid and sensitive diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 in the real world and will improve the current COVID-19 screening efforts for control and mitigation of the pandemic.

Neuro-ophthalmic manifestations of coronavirus disease 19.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To provide a summary of the neuro-ophthalmic manifestations of coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19), documented in the literature thus far. RECENT FINDINGS: A small but growing literature documents cases of new onset neuro-ophthalmic disease, in the setting of COVID-19 infection. Patients with COVID-19 have experienced acute onset vision loss, optic neuritis, cranial neuropathies, and Miller Fisher syndrome. In addition, COVID-19 increases the risk of cerebrovascular diseases that can impact the visual system. SUMMARY: The literature on COVID-19 continues to evolve. Although COVID-19 primarily impacts the respiratory system, there are several reports of new onset neuro-ophthalmic conditions in COVID-infected patients. When patients present with new onset neuro-ophthalmic issues, COVID-19 should be kept on the differential. Testing for COVID-19 should be considered, especially when fever or respiratory symptoms are also present. When screening general patients for COVID-19-associated symptoms, frontline physicians can consider including questions about diplopia, eye pain, pain with extraocular movements, decreased vision, gait issues, and other neurologic symptoms. The presence of these symptoms may increase the overall probability of viral infection, especially when fever or respiratory symptoms are present. More research is needed to establish a causal relationship between COVID-19 and neuro-ophthalmic disease, and better understand pathogenesis.

A review of current effective COVID-19 testing methods and quality control.

COVID-19 is a highly infectious disease caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus, which primarily affects the respiratory system and can lead to severe illness. The virus is extremely contagious, early and accurate diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 is crucial to contain its spread, to provide prompt treatment, and to prevent complications. Currently, the reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) is considered to be the gold standard for detecting COVID-19 in its early stages. In addition, loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LMAP), clustering rule interval short palindromic repeats (CRISPR), colloidal gold immunochromatographic assay (GICA), computed tomography (CT), and electrochemical sensors are also common tests. However, these different methods vary greatly in terms of their detection efficiency, specificity, accuracy, sensitivity, cost, and throughput. Besides, most of the current detection methods are conducted in central hospitals and laboratories, which is a great challenge for remote and underdeveloped areas. Therefore, it is essential to review the advantages and disadvantages of different COVID-19 detection methods, as well as the technology that can enhance detection efficiency and improve detection quality in greater details.

Meta-analysis of diagnostic performance of serological tests for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies up to 25 April 2020 and public health implications.

We reviewed the diagnostic accuracy of SARS-CoV-2 serological tests. Random-effects models yielded a summary sensitivity of 82% for IgM, and 85% for IgG and total antibodies. For specificity, the pooled estimate were 98% for IgM and 99% for IgG and total antibodies. In populations with ≤ 5% of seroconverted individuals, unless the assays have perfect (i.e. 100%) specificity, the positive predictive value would be ≤ 88%. Serological tests should be used for prevalence surveys only in hard-hit areas.

Comprehensive, Comparative Evaluation of 35 Manual SARS-CoV-2 Serological Assays.

The onset of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic resulted in hundreds of in vitro diagnostic devices (IVDs) coming to market, facilitated by regulatory authorities allowing "emergency use" without a comprehensive evaluation of performance. The World Health Organization (WHO) released target product profiles (TPPs) specifying acceptable performance characteristics for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) assay devices. We evaluated 26 rapid diagnostic tests and 9 enzyme immunoassays (EIAs) for anti-SARS-CoV-2, suitable for use in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), against these TPPs and other performance characteristics. The sensitivity and specificity ranged from 60.1 to 100% and 56.0 to 100%, respectively. Five of 35 test kits reported no false reactivity for 55 samples with potentially cross-reacting substances. Six test kits reported no false reactivity for 35 samples containing interfering substances, and only one test reported no false reactivity with samples positive for other coronaviruses (not SARS-CoV-2). This study demonstrates that a comprehensive evaluation of the performance of test kits against defined specifications is essential for the selection of test kits, especially in a pandemic setting. IMPORTANCE The markets have been flooded with hundreds of SARS-CoV-2 serology tests, and although there are many published reports on their performance, comparative reports are far fewer and tend to be limited to only a few tests. In this report, we comparatively assessed 35 rapid diagnostic tests or microtiter plate enzyme immunoassays (EIAs) using a large set of samples from individuals with a history of mild to moderate COVID-19, commensurate with the target population for serosurveillance, which included serum samples from individuals previously infected, at undetermined time periods, with other seasonal human coronaviruses, Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV), and SARS-CoV-1. The significant heterogeneity in their performances, with only a few tests meeting WHO target product profile performance requirements, highlights the importance of independent comparative assessments to inform the use and procurement of these tests for both diagnostics and epidemiological investigations.

Comparison of diagnostic performance of RT-qPCR, RT-LAMP and IgM/IgG rapid tests for detection of SARS-CoV-2 among healthcare workers in Brazil.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 has become a major public health problem after the outbreak caused by SARS-CoV-2 virus. Great efforts to contain COVID-19 transmission have been applied worldwide. In this context, accurate and fast diagnosis is essential. METHODS: In this prospective study, we evaluated the clinical performance of three different RNA-based molecular tests - RT-qPCR (Charité protocol), RT-qPCR (CDC (USA) protocol) and RT-LAMP - and one rapid test for detecting anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgM and IgG antibodies. RESULTS: Our results demonstrate that RT-qPCR using the CDC (USA) protocol is the most accurate diagnostic test among those evaluated, while oro-nasopharyngeal swabs are the most appropriate biological sample. RT-LAMP was the RNA-based molecular test with lowest sensitivity while the serological test presented the lowest sensitivity among all evaluated tests, indicating that the latter test is not a good predictor of disease in the first days after symptoms onset. Additionally, we observed higher viral load in individuals who reported more than 3 symptoms at the baseline. Nevertheless, viral load had not impacted the probability of testing positive for SARS-CoV-2. CONCLUSION: Our data indicates that RT-qPCR using the CDC (USA) protocol in oro-nasopharyngeal swabs samples should be the method of choice to diagnosis COVID-19.