Evaluation and comparison of the sensitivity of three commercial RT-qPCR kits used for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 in Santiago, Chile.

Introduction: The COVID-19 pandemic is still in force, causing global public health challenges and threats. Although vaccination and herd immunity have proven to be the most efficient way to control the pandemic, massive and early testing of patients using the RT-qPCR technique is crucial for constant genomic surveillance. The appearance of variants of SARS-CoV-2 with new mutations can reduce the efficiency of diagnostic detection. In this sense, several commercial RT-qPCR kits have been the target of extensive analysis because low assay performance could lead to false-negative diagnoses. Methods: In this study, we evaluated the performance of three commercial RT-qPCR kits; Thermo Fisher (TaqMan 2019-nCoV Assay Kit v1), BGI and Roche (LightCycler® Multiplex RNA Virus Master) used for the diagnosis of COVID-19 throughout the pandemic in Santiago de Chile. Results: Under our best assay conditions, we found significant differences in Cq amplification values for control and viral probes, against the same nasopharyngeal swab samples (NPSs). In addition, in some cases, the sensitivity of the RT-qPCR kits decreased against viral variants. Conclusion: Our study suggests evaluating the RT-qPCR kits used to detect SARS-CoV-2 because variants such as Omicron, which has several mutations, can compromise their detection and underestimate viral circulation.

Analysis by real-time PCR of five transport and conservation mediums of nasopharyngeal swab samples to COVID-19 diagnosis in Santiago of Chile.

Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, many transport kits have been manufactured to preserve and transport nasopharyngeal swab samples (NPSs) from patients. However, there is no information on the performance of the different virus transport media (VTM) used in COVID-19 diagnosis in the population of Santiago de Chile. We compared the RT-qPCR amplification profile of five different viral transport kit mediums, including DNA/RNA Shield™, NAT, VTM-N, Ezmedlab™, and phosphate-buffered saline (PBS), for NPSs from Central Metropolitan Health Service, Santiago, Chile. The DNA/RNA Shield™ medium showed a better performance in terms of Cq and RFU values for the internal reference RNase P and viral ORF1ab probes. By contrast, the PBS transport medium registered higher Cq values for the viral and reference gene, compared to the other VTM. DNA/RNA Shield™ shows higher relative fluorescence units (RFUs) and lower Cq values for the reference gene. Collectively, our results suggest that the PBS medium could compromise the sample diagnosis because of its lower RT-qPCR performance. The NAT, Ezmedlab and VTM-N, and DNA/RNA Shield™ media show acceptable RT-qPCR parameters and, consequently, seem suitable for use in COVID-19 diagnosis.