Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Variability of cycle threshold values in an external quality assessment scheme for detection of the SARS-CoV-2 virus genome by RT-PCR.
Buchta, Christoph; Görzer, Irene; Chiba, Peter; Camp, Jeremy V; Holzmann, Heidemarie; Puchhammer-Stöckl, Elisabeth; Mayerhofer, Maximilian; Müller, Mathias M; Aberle, Stephan W.
  • Buchta C; Austrian Association for Quality Assurance and Standardization of Medical and Diagnostic Tests (ÖQUASTA), Vienna, Austria.
  • Görzer I; Center for Virology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
  • Chiba P; Austrian Association for Quality Assurance and Standardization of Medical and Diagnostic Tests (ÖQUASTA), Vienna, Austria.
  • Camp JV; Center for Virology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
  • Holzmann H; Center for Virology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
  • Puchhammer-Stöckl E; Center for Virology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
  • Mayerhofer M; Armament and Defence Technology Agency, NBC & Environmental Protection Technology Division, Vienna, Austria.
  • Müller MM; Austrian Association for Quality Assurance and Standardization of Medical and Diagnostic Tests (ÖQUASTA), Vienna, Austria.
  • Aberle SW; Center for Virology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Clin Chem Lab Med ; 59(5): 987-994, 2021 04 27.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1024424
ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES:

The qualitative results of SARS-CoV-2 specific real-time reverse transcription (RT) PCR are used for initial diagnosis and follow-up of Covid-19 patients and asymptomatic virus carriers. However, clinical decision-making and health management policies often are based additionally on cycle threshold (Ct) values (i.e., quantitative results) to guide patient care, segregation and discharge management of individuals testing positive. Therefore, an analysis of inter-protocol variability is needed to assess the comparability of the quantitative results.

METHODS:

Ct values reported in a SARS-CoV-2 virus genome detection external quality assessment challenge were analyzed. Three positive and two negative samples were distributed to participating test laboratories. Qualitative results (positive/negative) and quantitative results (Ct values) were assessed.

RESULTS:

A total of 66 laboratories participated, contributing results from 101 distinct test systems and reporting Ct values for a total of 92 different protocols. In all three positive samples, the means of the Ct values for the E-, N-, S-, RdRp-, and ORF1ab-genes varied by less than two cycles. However, 7.7% of reported results deviated by more than ±4.0 (maximum 18.0) cycles from the respective individual means. These larger deviations appear to be systematic errors.

CONCLUSIONS:

In an attempt to use PCR diagnostics beyond the identification of infected individuals, laboratories are frequently requested to report Ct values along with a qualitative result. This study highlights the limitations of interpreting Ct values from the various SARS-CoV genome detection protocols and suggests that standardization is necessary in the reporting of Ct values with respect to the target gene.
Subject(s)
Keywords

Full text: Available Collection: International databases Database: MEDLINE Main subject: DNA, Viral / Genome, Viral / Reverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction / COVID-19 Nucleic Acid Testing / SARS-CoV-2 Type of study: Cohort study / Diagnostic study / Prognostic study / Qualitative research / Systematic review/Meta Analysis Limits: Humans Language: English Journal: Clin Chem Lab Med Journal subject: Chemistry, Clinical / Laboratory Techniques and procedures Year: 2021 Document Type: Article Affiliation country: Cclm-2020-1602

Similar

MEDLINE

...
LILACS

LIS


Full text: Available Collection: International databases Database: MEDLINE Main subject: DNA, Viral / Genome, Viral / Reverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction / COVID-19 Nucleic Acid Testing / SARS-CoV-2 Type of study: Cohort study / Diagnostic study / Prognostic study / Qualitative research / Systematic review/Meta Analysis Limits: Humans Language: English Journal: Clin Chem Lab Med Journal subject: Chemistry, Clinical / Laboratory Techniques and procedures Year: 2021 Document Type: Article Affiliation country: Cclm-2020-1602