ABSTRACT
BackgroundIn the current COVID-19 pandemic there is mass screening of SARS-CoV-2 happening round the world due to the extensive spread of the infections. There is a high demand for rapid diagnostic tests to expedite identification of cases and to facilitate early isolation and control spread. Hence this study evaluates seven different rapid nucleic acid detection assays that are commercially available for SARS-CoV-2 virus detection. MethodsNasopharyngeal samples were collected from 4859 participants and were tested for SARS-CoV-2 virus by the gold standard RT-PCR method along with one of these seven rapid methods of detection. Evaluation of the rapid nucleic acid detection assays was done by comparing the results of these rapid methods with the gold standard RT-qPCR results for SARS-COV-2 detection. ResultsAQ-TOP had the highest sensitivity (98%) and strong kappa value of 0.943 followed by Genechecker and Abbot ID NOW. The POCKIT (ii RT-PCR) assay had the highest test accuracy of 99.29% followed by Genechecker and Cobas Liat. Atila iAMP showed the highest percentage of invalid reports (35.5%) followed by AQ-TOP with 6% and POCKIT with 3.7% of invalid reports. ConclusionGenechecker system, Abbott ID NOW and Cobas Liat, were found to have best performance and agreement when compared to the standard RT-PCR for COVID-19 detection. With further research, these rapid tests have the potential to be employed in large scale screening of COVID-19.
ABSTRACT
BackgroundThe current pandemic of SARS- COV- 2 virus, widely known as COVID-19 has affected millions of people around the world. The World Health Organization (WHO) has recommended vigorous testing to differentiate SARS-CoV-2 from other respiratory infections to aid in guiding appropriate care and management. Situations like this have demanded robust testing strategies and pooled testing of samples for SARS- COV- 2 virus has provided the solution to mass screening of people. The pooled testing strategy can be very effective in testing with limited resources, yet it comes with its own limitations. These limitations need critical consideration when it comes to testing of highly infectious disease like COVID -19. MethodsThe study evaluated the pooled testing of nasopharyngeal swabs for SARS- COV- 2 by comparing sensitivity of individual sample testing with 4 and 8 pool sample testing. Median cycle threshold (Ct) values were compared. The precision of pooled testing was assessed by doing an inter and intra assay of pooled samples. Coefficient of variance was calculated for inter and intra assay variability. ResultsThe sensitivity becomes considerably low when the samples are pooled, there is a higher percentage of false negatives with higher pool size and when the patient viral load is low or weak positive samples. High variability was seen in the intra and inter assay, especially in weak positive samples and larger pool size. ConclusionAs COVID - 19 numbers are still high and testing capacity needs to be high, we have to meticulously evaluate the testing strategy for each country depending on its testing capacity, infrastructure, economic strength, and need to make a serious call on cost effective strategy of resource saving and risk/ cost of missing positive patients.
ABSTRACT
In this current COVID - 19 pandemic, there is a dire need for cost effective and less time-consuming alternatives for SARS-COV-2 testing. The RNA extraction free method for detecting SARS-COV-2 in saliva is a promising option, this study found that it has high sensitivity (85.34%), specificity (95.04%) and was comparable to the gold standard nasopharyngeal swab. The method showed good percentage of agreement (kappa coefficient) 0.797 between salivary and NPS samples. However, there are variations in the sensitivity and specificity based on the RT-PCR kit used. The Thermo Fischer-Applied biosystems showed high sensitivity, PPV and NPV but also showed higher percentage of invalid reports. Whereas the BGI kit showed high specificity, better agreement (kappa coefficient) between the results of saliva and NPS samples and higher correlation between the Ct values of saliva and NPS samples. Thus, the RNA extraction free method for salivary sample serves as an effective alternative for SARS-CoV 2-testing.
