Sensitivity of different RT-qPCR solutions for SARS-CoV-2 detection

被引:46
作者
Alcoba-Florez, Julia [1 ]
Gil-Campesino, Helena [1 ]
Garcia-Martinez de Artola, Diego [1 ]
Gonzalez-Montelongo, Rafaela [2 ]
Valenzuela-Fernandez, Agustin [3 ,4 ,5 ]
Ciuffreda, Laura [6 ]
Flores, Carlos [2 ,6 ,7 ,8 ]
机构
[1] Hosp Univ NS de Candelaria, Serv Microbiol, Microbiol Serv, Santa Cruz De Tenerife, Spain
[2] Inst Tecnol & Energias Renovables, Genom Div, Santa Cruz De Tenerife, Spain
[3] Univ La Laguna, Fac Med, Unidad Farmacol, Lab Inmunol Celular & Viral, San Cristobal La Laguna, Spain
[4] Univ La Laguna, IUETSPC, San Cristobal La Laguna, Spain
[5] Inst Salud Carlos III, Red Espanola Invest VIH SIDA RIS RETIC, Madrid, Spain
[6] Hosp Univ NS de Candelaria, Res Unit, Carretera Rosario S-N, Santa Cruz De Tenerife 38010, Spain
[7] Inst Salud Carlos III, CIBER Enfermedades Resp, Madrid, Spain
[8] Univ La Laguna, Inst Tecnol Biomed, San Cristobal La Laguna, Spain
关键词
COVID-19; SARS-CoV-2; Diagnosis; False negatives; Solution comparisons; Sensitivity;
D O I
10.1016/j.ijid.2020.07.058
中图分类号
R51 [传染病];
学科分类号
100401 ;
摘要
Objectives: The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic continues to impose demands on diagnostic screening. In anticipation that the recurrence of outbreaks and the measures for lifting the lockdown worldwide may cause supply chain issues over the coming months, this study assessed the sensitivity of a number of one-step retrotranscription and quantitative polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR) solutions to detect SARS-CoV-2. Methods: Six different RT-qPCR alternatives were evaluated for SARS-CoV-2/COVID-19 diagnosis based on standard RNA extractions. The one with best sensitivity was also assessed with direct nasopharyngeal swab viral transmission medium (VTM) heating; thus overcoming the RNA extraction step. Results: A wide variability in the sensitivity of RT-qPCR solutions was found that was associated with a range of false negatives from 2% (0.3-7.9%) to 39.8% (30.2-50.2%). Direct preheating of VTM combined with the best solution provided a sensitivity of 72.5% (62.5-81.0%), in the range of some of the solutions based on standard RNA extractions. Conclusions: Sensitivity limitations of currently used RT-qPCR solutions were found. These results will help to calibrate the impact of false negative diagnoses of COVID-19, and to detect and control new SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks and community transmissions. (c) 2020 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd on behalf of International Society for Infectious Diseases.
引用
收藏
页码:190 / 192
页数:3
相关论文
共 10 条
  • [1] Fast SARS-CoV-2 detection by RT-qPCR in preheated nasopharyngeal swab samples
    Alcoba-Florez, Julia
    Gonzalez-Montelongo, Rafaela
    inigo-Campos, Antonio
    de Artola, Diego Garcia-Martinez
    Gil-Campesino, Helena
    Ciuffreda, Laura
    Valenzuela-Fernandez, Agustin
    Flores, Carlos
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF INFECTIOUS DISEASES, 2020, 97 : 66 - 68
  • [2] Performance of VivaDiag COVID-19 IgM/IgG Rapid Test is inadequate for diagnosis of COVID-19 in acute patients referring to emergency room department
    Cassaniti, Irene
    Novazzi, Federica
    Giardina, Federica
    Salinaro, Francesco
    Sachs, Michele
    Perlini, Stefano
    Bruno, Raffaele
    Mojoli, Francesco
    Baldanti, Fausto
    [J]. JOURNAL OF MEDICAL VIROLOGY, 2020, 92 (10) : 1724 - 1727
  • [3] Detection of 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) by real-time RT-PCR (Publication with Expression of Concern)
    Corman, Victor M.
    Landt, Olfert
    Kaiser, Marco
    Molenkamp, Richard
    Meijer, Adam
    Chu, Daniel K. W.
    Bleicker, Tobias
    Bruenink, Sebastian
    Schneider, Julia
    Schmidt, Marie Luisa
    Mulders, Daphne G. J. C.
    Haagmans, Bart L.
    van der Veer, Bas
    van den Brink, Sharon
    Wijsman, Lisa
    Goderski, Gabriel
    Romette, Jean-Louis
    Ellis, Joanna
    Zambon, Maria
    Peiris, Malik
    Goossens, Herman
    Reusken, Chantal
    Koopmans, Marion P. G.
    Drosten, Christian
    [J]. EUROSURVEILLANCE, 2020, 25 (03) : 23 - 30
  • [4] Overcoming the bottleneck to widespread testing: a rapid review of nucleic acid testing approaches for COVID-19 detection
    Esbin, Meagan N.
    Whitney, Oscar N.
    Chong, Shasha
    Maurer, Anna
    Darzacq, Xavier
    Tjian, Robert
    [J]. RNA, 2020, 26 (07) : 771 - 783
  • [5] Nalla AK, 2020, J CLIN MICROBIOL, V58, DOI [10.1128/JCM.00557-20, 10.1101/2020.03.13.20035618]
  • [6] Viral load of SARS-CoV-2 in clinical samples
    Pan, Yang
    Zhang, Daitao
    Yang, Peng
    Poon, Leo L. M.
    Wang, Quanyi
    [J]. LANCET INFECTIOUS DISEASES, 2020, 20 (04) : 411 - 412
  • [7] Report from the American Society for Microbiology COVID-19 International Summit, 23 March 2020: Value of Diagnostic Testing for SARS-CoV-2/COVID-19
    Patel, Robin
    Babady, Esther
    Theel, Elitza S.
    Storch, Gregory A.
    Pinsky, Benjamin A.
    St George, Kirsten
    Smith, Tara C.
    Bertuzzi, Stefano
    [J]. MBIO, 2020, 11 (02)
  • [8] 'Test, re-test, re-test': using inaccurate tests to greatly increase the accuracy of COVID-19 testing
    Ramdas, Kamalini
    Darzi, Ara
    Jain, Sanjay
    [J]. NATURE MEDICINE, 2020, 26 (06) : 810 - 811
  • [9] Vogels C.B.F., 2020, ANAL SENSITIVITY EFF, DOI [10.1101/2020.03.30.20048108, DOI 10.1101/2020.03.30.20048108]
  • [10] Virological assessment of hospitalized patients with COVID-2019 (vol 581, pg 465, 2020)
    Wolfel, Roman
    Corman, Victor M.
    Guggemos, Wolfgang
    Seilmaier, Michael
    Zange, Sabine
    Muller, Marcel A.
    Niemeyer, Daniela
    Jones, Terry C.
    Vollmar, Patrick
    Rothe, Camilla
    Hoelscher, Michael
    Bleicker, Tobias
    Brunink, Sebastian
    Schneider, Julia
    Ehmann, Rosina
    Zwirglmaier, Katrin
    Drosten, Christian
    Wendtner, Clemens
    [J]. NATURE, 2020, 588 (7839) : E35 - E35