Thermal inactivation and nucleic acid amplification-based testing for SARS-CoV-2.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Pere H
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7419268 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Oct
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Thermal inactivation and nucleic acid amplification-based testing for SARS-CoV-2.
Péré Hélène H Podglajen Isabelle I Baillard Jean-Louis JL Mboumba Bouassa Ralph-Sydney RS Veyer David D Bélec Laurent L
Journal of clinical virology : the official publication of the Pan American Society for Clinical Virology 20200812
Similar Datasets
Project description:The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has caused a large global outbreak. It is accordingly important to develop accurate and rapid diagnostic methods. The polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-based method including reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) is the most widely used assay for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA. Along with the RT-PCR method, digital PCR has emerged as a powerful tool to quantify nucleic acid of the virus with high accuracy and sensitivity. Non-PCR based techniques such as reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and reverse transcription recombinase polymerase amplification (RT-RPA) are considered to be rapid and simple nucleic acid detection methods and were reviewed in this paper. Non-conventional molecular diagnostic methods including next-generation sequencing (NGS), CRISPR-based assays and nanotechnology are improving the accuracy and sensitivity of COVID-19 diagnosis. In this review, we also focus on standardization of SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid testing and the activity of the National Metrology Institutes (NMIs) and highlight resources such as reference materials (RM) that provide the values of specified properties. Finally, we summarize the useful resources for convenient COVID-19 molecular diagnostics.
| S-EPMC8201071 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesWhen the prevalence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is low, many positive test results are false positives. Confirmatory testing reduces overdiagnosis and nosocomial infection and enables real-world estimates of test specificity and positive predictive value. This study estimates these parameters to evaluate the impact of confirmatory testing and to improve clinical diagnosis, epidemiological estimation and interpretation of vaccine trials.MethodsOver 1 month we took all respiratory samples from our laboratory with a patient's first detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA (Hologic Aptima SARS-CoV-2 assay or in-house RT-PCR platform), and repeated testing using two platforms. Samples were categorized by source, and by whether clinical details suggested COVID-19 or corroborative testing from another laboratory. We estimated specificity and positive predictive value using approaches based on maximum likelihood.ResultsOf 19 597 samples, SARS-CoV-2 RNA was detected in 107; 52 corresponded to first-time detection (0.27% of tests on samples without previous detection). Further testing detected SARS-CoV-2 RNA once or more ('confirmed') in 29 samples (56%), and failed to detect SARS-CoV-2 RNA ('not confirmed') in 23 (44%). Depending upon assumed parameters, point estimates for specificity and positive predictive value were 99.91-99.98% and 61.8-89.8% respectively using the Hologic Aptima SARS-CoV-2 assay, and 97.4-99.1% and 20.1-73.8% respectively using an in-house assay.ConclusionsNucleic acid amplification testing for SARS-CoV-2 is highly specific. Nevertheless, when prevalence is low a significant proportion of initially positive results fail to confirm, and confirmatory testing substantially reduces the detection of false positives. Omitting additional testing in samples with higher prior detection probabilities focuses testing where it is clinically impactful and minimizes delay.
| S-EPMC7554481 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAntigen tests for SARS-CoV-2 offer advantages over nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs, such as RT-PCR), including lower cost and rapid return of results, but show reduced sensitivity. Public health organizations recommend different strategies for utilizing NAATs and antigen tests. We sought to create a framework for the quantitative comparison of these recommended strategies based on their expected performance.MethodsWe utilized a decision analysis approach to simulate the expected outcomes of six testing algorithms analogous to strategies recommended by public health organizations. Each algorithm was simulated 50,000 times in a population of 100,000 persons seeking testing. Primary outcomes were number of missed cases, number of false-positive diagnoses, and total test volumes. Outcome medians and 95% uncertainty ranges (URs) were reported.ResultsAlgorithms that use NAATs to confirm all negative antigen results minimized missed cases but required high NAAT capacity: 92,200 (95% UR: 91,200-93,200) tests (in addition to 100,000 antigen tests) at 10% prevalence. Selective use of NAATs to confirm antigen results when discordant with symptom status (e.g., symptomatic persons with negative antigen results) resulted in the most efficient use of NAATs, with 25 NAATs (95% UR: 13-57) needed to detect one additional case compared to exclusive use of antigen tests.ConclusionsNo single SARS-CoV-2 testing algorithm is likely to be optimal across settings with different levels of prevalence and for all programmatic priorities. This analysis provides a framework for selecting setting-specific strategies to achieve acceptable balances and trade-offs between programmatic priorities and resource constraints.
| S-EPMC8756411 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in an unprecedented global demand for in vitro diagnostic reagents. Supply shortages and hoarding have impacted testing capacity which has led to inefficient COVID-19 case identification and transmission control, predominantly in developing countries. Traditionally, RNA extraction is a prerequisite for conducting SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid amplification tests (NAAT); however, simplified methods of sample processing have been successful at bypassing typical nucleic acid extraction steps, enabling extraction-free SARS-CoV-2 NAAT workflows. These methods involve chemical and physical approaches that are inexpensive and easily accessible alternatives to overcome extraction kit supply shortages, while offering acceptable test performance. Here we provide an overview of three main sample preparation strategies that have been shown to facilitate extraction-free SARS-CoV-2 NAATs.
| S-EPMC9230587 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC8755414 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The degradation of SARS-CoV-2 specific ribonucleic acid (RNA) was investigated by a numerical modeling approach based on nucleic acid amplification test (NAAT) results utilizing the SmartAmp technique. The precision of the measurement was verified by the relative standard deviation (RSD) of repeated measurements at each calibration point. The precision and detection limits were found to be 6% RSD (seven repeated measurements) and 94 copies/tube, respectively, at the lowest calibration point. RNA degradation curves obtained from NAAT data on four different temperatures were in good agreement with the first-order reaction model. By referring to rate constants derived from the results, the Arrhenius model was applied to predict RNA degradation behavior. If the initial RNA concentration was high enough, such as in samples taken from infected bodies, the NAAT results were expected to be positive during testing. On the other hand, if initial RNA concentrations were relatively low, such as RNA in residual viruses on environmental surfaces, special attention should be paid to avoid false-negative results. The results obtained in this study provide a practical guide for RNA sample management in the NAAT of non-human samples.
| S-EPMC8916628 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted that new diagnostic technologies are essential for controlling disease transmission. Here, we develop SHINE (Streamlined Highlighting of Infections to Navigate Epidemics), a sensitive and specific diagnostic tool that can detect SARS-CoV-2 RNA from unextracted samples. We identify the optimal conditions to allow RPA-based amplification and Cas13-based detection to occur in a single step, simplifying assay preparation and reducing run-time. We improve HUDSON to rapidly inactivate viruses in nasopharyngeal swabs and saliva in 10 min. SHINE's results can be visualized with an in-tube fluorescent readout - reducing contamination risk as amplification reaction tubes remain sealed - and interpreted by a companion smartphone application. We validate SHINE on 50 nasopharyngeal patient samples, demonstrating 90% sensitivity and 100% specificity compared to RT-qPCR with a sample-to-answer time of 50 min. SHINE has the potential to be used outside of hospitals and clinical laboratories, greatly enhancing diagnostic capabilities.
| S-EPMC7680145 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Early diagnosis with rapid detection of the virus plays a key role in preventing the spread of infection and in treating patients effectively. In order to address the need for a straightforward detection of SARS-CoV-2 infection and assessment of viral spread, we developed rapid, sensitive, extraction-free one-step reverse transcription-quantitative polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR) and reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) tests for detecting SARS-CoV-2 in saliva. We analyzed over 700 matched pairs of saliva and nasopharyngeal swab (NSB) specimens from asymptomatic and symptomatic individuals. Saliva, as either an oral cavity swab or passive drool, was collected in an RNA stabilization buffer. The stabilized saliva specimens were heat-treated and directly analyzed without RNA extraction. The diagnostic sensitivity of saliva-based RT-qPCR was at least 95% in individuals with subclinical infection and outperformed RT-LAMP, which had at least 70% sensitivity when compared to NSBs analyzed with a clinical RT-qPCR test. The diagnostic sensitivity for passive drool saliva was higher than that of oral cavity swab specimens (95% and 87%, respectively). A rapid, sensitive one-step extraction-free RT-qPCR test for detecting SARS-CoV-2 in passive drool saliva is operationally simple and can be easily implemented using existing testing sites, thus allowing high-throughput, rapid, and repeated testing of large populations. Furthermore, saliva testing is adequate to detect individuals in an asymptomatic screening program and can help improve voluntary screening compliance for those individuals averse to various forms of nasal collections.
| S-EPMC8588466 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, an ongoing global health crisis, has revealed the need for new technologies that integrate the sensitivity and specificity of RT-PCR tests with a faster time-to-detection. Here, an emulsion loop-mediated isothermal amplification (eLAMP) platform was developed to allow for the compartmentalization of LAMP reactions, leading to faster changes in emulsion characteristics, and thus lowering time-to-detection. Within these droplets, ongoing LAMP reactions lead to adsorption of amplicons to the water-oil interface, causing a decrease in interfacial tension, resulting in smaller emulsion diameters. Changes in emulsion diameter allow for the monitoring of the reaction by use of angle-dependent light scatter (based off Mie scatter theory). Mie scatter simulations confirmed that light scatter intensity is diameter-dependent and smaller colloids have lower intensity values compared to larger colloids. Via spectrophotometers and fiber optic cables placed at 30° and 60°, light scatter intensity was monitored. Scatter intensities collected at 5 min, 30° could statistically differentiate 10, 103, and 105 copies/μL initial concentrations compared to NTC. Similarly, 5 min scatter intensities collected at 60° could statistically differentiate 105 copies/μL initial concentrations in comparison to NTC. The use of both angles during the eLAMP assay allows for distinction between high and low initial target concentrations. The efficacy of a smartphone-based platform was also tested and had a similar limit of detection and assay time of less than 10 min. Furthermore, fluorescence-labeled primers were used to validate target nucleic acid amplification. Compared to existing LAMP assays for SARS-CoV-2 detection, these times-to-detections are very rapid.
| S-EPMC7892303 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundSARS-CoV-2 is a newly emerged coronavirus, causing the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak in December, 2019. As drugs and vaccines of COVID-19 remain in development, accurate virus detection plays a crucial role in the current public health crisis. Quantitative real-time reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR) kits have been reliably used for detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA since the beginning of the COVID-19 outbreak, whereas isothermal nucleic acid amplification-based point-of-care automated kits have also been considered as a simpler and rapid alternative. However, as these kits have only been developed and applied clinically within a short timeframe, their clinical performance has not been adequately evaluated to date. We describe a comparative study between a newly developed cross-priming isothermal amplification (CPA) kit (Kit A) and five RT-qPCR kits (Kits B-F) to evaluate their sensitivity, specificity, predictive values and accuracy.MethodsFifty-two clinical samples were used including throat swabs (n = 30), nasal swabs (n = 7), nasopharyngeal swabs (n = 7) and sputum specimens (n = 8), comprising confirmed (n = 26) and negative cases (n = 26). SARS-CoV-2 detection was simultaneously performed on each sample using six nucleic acid amplification kits. The sensitivity, specificity, positive/negative predictive values (PPV/NPV) and the accuracy for each kit were assessed using clinical manifestation and molecular diagnoses as the reference standard. Reproducibility for RT-qPCR kits was evaluated in triplicate by three different operators using a SARS-CoV-2 RNA-positive sample. On the basis of the six kits' evaluation results, CPA kit (Kit A) and two RT-qPCR Kits (Kit B and F) were applied to the SARS-CoV-2 detection in close-contacts of COVID-19 patients.ResultsFor Kit A, the sensitivity, specificity, PPV/NPV and accuracy were 100%. Among the five RT-qPCR kits, Kits B, C and F had good agreement with the clinical diagnostic reports (Kappa ≥ 0.75); Kits D and E were less congruent (0.4 ≤ Kappa < 0.75). Differences between all kits were statistically significant (P < 0.001). The reproducibility of RT-qPCR kits was determined using a coefficients of variation (CV) between 0.95% and 2.57%, indicating good reproducibility.ConclusionsThis is the first comparative study to evaluate CPA and RT-qPCR kits' specificity and sensitivity for SARS-CoV-2 detection, and could serve as a reference for clinical laboratories, thus informing testing protocols amid the rapidly progressing COVID-19 pandemic.
| S-EPMC8140580 | biostudies-literature