Dataset Information

Modular micro-PCR system for the onsite rapid diagnosis of COVID-19.

ABSTRACT: Effective containment of the COVID-19 pandemic requires rapid and accurate detection of the pathogen. Polymerase chain reaction (PCR) remains the gold standard for COVID-19 confirmation. In this article, we report the performance of a cost-effective modular microfluidic reverse transcription (RT)-PCR and RT-loop mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) platform, Epidax®, for the point-of-care testing and confirmation of SARS-CoV-2. This platform is versatile and can be reconfigured either for screening using endpoint RT-PCR or RT-LAMP tests or for confirmatory tests using real-time RT-PCR. Epidax® is highly sensitive and detects as little as 1 RNA copy per µL for real-time and endpoint RT-PCR, while using only half of the reagents. We achieved comparable results with those of a commercial platform when detecting SARS-CoV-2 viruses from 81 clinical RNA extracts. Epidax® can also detect SARS-CoV-2 from 44 nasopharyngeal samples without RNA extraction by using a direct RT-PCR assay, which shortens the sample-to-answer time to an hour with minimal user steps. Furthermore, we validated the technology using an RT-LAMP assay on 54 clinical RNA extracts. Overall, our platform provides a sensitive, cost-effective, and accurate diagnostic solution for low-resource settings.

SUBMITTER: Nguyen PQM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9294789 | biostudies-literature | 2022

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Modular micro-PCR system for the onsite rapid diagnosis of COVID-19.

Nguyen Phuong Quoc Mai PQM Wang Ming M Ann Maria Nelisha N Li Adelicia Yongling AY Tan Hsih Yin HY Xiong Gordon Minru GM Tan Meng-Kwang Marcus MM Bhagat Ali Asgar S AAS Ong Catherine W M CWM Lim Chwee Teck CT

Microsystems & nanoengineering 20220719

Effective containment of the COVID-19 pandemic requires rapid and accurate detection of the pathogen. Polymerase chain reaction (PCR) remains the gold standard for COVID-19 confirmation. In this article, we report the performance of a cost-effective modular microfluidic reverse transcription (RT)-PCR and RT-loop mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) platform, Epidax®, for the point-of-care testing and confirmation of SARS-CoV-2. This platform is versatile and can be reconfigured either for ...[more]

PMID: 35860034

Similar Datasets

Project description:Accurate and early diagnoses are prerequisites for prompt treatment. For coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), it is even more crucial. Currently, choice of methods include rapid diagnostic tests and reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) using samples mostly of respiratory origin and sometimes saliva. We evaluated two rapid diagnostic tests with three specimen types using viral transport medium (VTM) containing naso-oropharyngeal (NOP) swabs, direct nasal and direct nasopharyngeal (NP) samples from 428 prospective patients. We also performed RT-PCR for 428 NOP VTM and 316 saliva samples to compare results. The sensitivity of the SD Biosensor Standard Q COVID-19 antigen (Ag) test kit drastically raised from an average of 65.55% (NOP VTM) to 85.25% (direct nasal samples), while RT-PCR was the gold standard. For the CareStart kit, the sensitivity was almost similar for direct NP swabs; the average was 84.57%. The specificities were ≥95% for both SD Biosensor Standard Q and CareStart COVID-19 Ag tests in all platforms. The kits were also able to detect patients with different variants as well. Alternatively, RT-PCR results from saliva and NOP VTM samples showed high sensitivities of 96.45% and 95.48% with respect to each other as standard. The overall results demonstrated high performance of the rapid tests, indicating the suitability for regular surveillance at clinical facilities when using direct nasal or direct NP samples rather than NOP VTM. Additionally, the analysis also signifies not showed that RT-PCR of saliva can be used as an choice of method to RT-PCR of NOP VTM, providing an easier, non-invasive sample collection method. IMPORTANCE There are several methods for the diagnosis of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), and the choice of methods depends mostly on the resources and level of sensitivity required by the user and health care providers. Still, reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) has been chosen as the best method using direct naso-oropharyngeal swabs. There are also other methods of fast detection, such as rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs), which offer result within 15 to 20 min and have become quite popular for self-testing and in the clinical setting. The major drawback of the currently used RT-PCR method is compliance, as it may cause irritation, and patients often refuse to test in such a way. RDTs, although inexpensive, suffer from low sensitivity due to technical issues. In this article, we propose saliva as a noninvasive source for RT-PCR samples and evaluate various specimen types at different times after infection for the best possible output from COVID-19 rapid tests.

Project description:The COVID-19 pandemic has given rise to numerous commercially available antigen rapid diagnostic tests (Ag-RDTs). To generate and to share accurate and independent data with the global community requires multisite prospective diagnostic evaluations of Ag-RDTs. This report describes the clinical evaluation of the OnSite COVID-19 rapid test (CTK Biotech, CA, USA) in Brazil and the United Kingdom. A total of 496 paired nasopharyngeal (NP) swabs were collected from symptomatic health care workers at Hospital das Clínicas in São Paulo, Brazil, and 211 NP swabs were collected from symptomatic participants at a COVID-19 drive-through testing site in Liverpool, United Kingdom. Swabs were analyzed by Ag-RDT, and results were compared to quantitative reverse transcriptase PCR (RT-qPCR). The clinical sensitivity of the OnSite COVID-19 rapid test in Brazil was 90.3% (95% confidence interval [CI], 75.1 to 96.7%) and in the United Kingdom was 75.3% (95% CI, 64.6 to 83.6%). The clinical specificity in Brazil was 99.4% (95% CI, 98.1 to 99.8%) and in the United Kingdom was 95.5% (95% CI, 90.6 to 97.9%). Concurrently, analytical evaluation of the Ag-RDT was assessed using direct culture supernatant of SARS-CoV-2 strains from wild-type (WT), Alpha, Delta, Gamma, and Omicron lineages. This study provides comparative performance of an Ag-RDT across two different settings, geographical areas, and populations. Overall, the OnSite Ag-RDT demonstrated a lower clinical sensitivity than claimed by the manufacturer. The sensitivity and specificity from the Brazil study fulfilled the performance criteria determined by the World Health Organization, but the performance obtained from the UK study failed to do. Further evaluation of Ag-RDTs should include harmonized protocols between laboratories to facilitate comparison between settings. IMPORTANCE Evaluating rapid diagnostic tests in diverse populations is essential to improving diagnostic responses as it gives an indication of the accuracy in real-world scenarios. In the case of rapid diagnostic testing within this pandemic, lateral flow tests that meet the minimum requirements for sensitivity and specificity can play a key role in increasing testing capacity, allowing timely clinical management of those infected, and protecting health care systems. This is particularly valuable in settings where access to the test gold standard is often restricted.

Dataset Information

Modular micro-PCR system for the onsite rapid diagnosis of COVID-19.

Publications

Modular micro-PCR system for the onsite rapid diagnosis of COVID-19.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets