Saliva sample pooling for the detection of SARS-CoV-2.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Pasomsub E
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7461487 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:The worldwide COVID-19 pandemic outburst has caused a serious public health issue with increasing needs of accurate and rapid diagnostic and screening testing. This situation requires an optimized management of the chemical reagents, the consumables, and the human resources, in order to respond accurately and effectively, controlling the spread of the disease. Testing on pooled samples maximizes the number of tested samples, by minimizing the time and the lab supplies needed. The general conceptualization of the pooling method is based on mixing samples together in a batch. Individual testing is needed only if a specific pool exhibits a positive result. The development of alternative hybrid methods, based on "in house" protocols, utilizing commercially available consumables, in combination with a reliable pooling method would provide a solution, focusing on the better exploitation of the personnel and the lab supplies, allowing for rapid screening of a population in a reasonably short time.
| S-EPMC7834440 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Due to increased demand for testing, as well as restricted supply chain resources, testing for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection continues to face many hurdles. Pooling several samples has been proposed as an alternative approach to address these issues. We investigated the feasibility of pooling nasopharyngeal swab (NPS) or saliva samples for SARS-CoV-2 testing with a commercial assay (Idylla SARS-CoV-2 test; Biocartis). We evaluated the 10-pool and 20-pool approaches for 149 subjects, with 30 positive samples and 119 negative samples. The 10-pool approach had sensitivity of 78.95% (95% confidence interval [CI], 54.43% to 93.95%) and specificity of 100% (95% CI, 71.51% to 100%), whereas the 20-pool approach had sensitivity of 55.56% (95% CI, 21.20% to 86.30%) and specificity of 100% (95% CI, 25% to 100%). No significant difference was observed between the results obtained with pooled NPS and saliva samples. Given the rapidity, full automation, and practical advantages of the Idylla SARS-CoV-2 assay, pooling of 10 samples has the potential to significantly increase testing capacity for both NPS and saliva samples, with good sensitivity. IMPORTANCE To control outbreaks of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and to avoid reagent shortages, testing strategies must be adapted and maintained for the foreseeable future. We analyzed the feasibility of pooling NPS and saliva samples for SARS-CoV-2 testing with the Idylla SARS-CoV-2 test, and we found that sensitivity was dependent on the pool size. The SARS-CoV-2 testing capacity with both NPS and saliva samples could be significantly expanded by pooling 10 samples; however, pooling 20 samples resulted in lower sensitivity.
| S-EPMC8579845 | biostudies-literature
Project description:SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has forced frequent testing of populations. It is necessary to identify the most cost-effective strategies for the detection of COVID-19 outbreaks. Nasopharyngeal samples have been used for SARS-CoV-2 detection but require a healthcare professional to collect the sample and cause discomfort and pain to the individual. Saliva has been suggested as an appropriate fluid for the diagnosis of COVID-19. We have investigated the possibility of using pools of saliva samples to detect SARS-CoV-2 in symptomatic and asymptomatic patients. Two hundred and seventy-nine saliva samples were analyzed through RT-PCR of Envelope, Nucleocapsid and Open Reading Frame 1ab genes. Reproducibility assays showed an almost perfect agreement as well as high sensitivity (96.6%), specificity (96.8%), positive predicted value (96.6%), and negative predicted value (96.8%). The average Cycle Threshold of the genes detected was 29.7. No significant differences (p > 0.05) were detected when comparing the cycle threshold average of two consecutive reactions on the same positive saliva samples. Saliva samples have a higher median viral load (32.6) than in nasopharyngeal samples (28.9), although no significant differences were detected (p > 0.05). Saliva-pool samples allowed effective SARS-CoV-2 screening, with a higher sensibility (96.9%) on 10-sample pools than in 20-sample pools (87.5%). Regardless of pools size specificity was high (99.9%) and an almost perfect agreement was observed. Our strategy was successfully applied in population wide testing of more than 2000 individuals, showing that it is possible to use pooled saliva as diagnostic fluid for SARS-CoV-2 infection.
| S-EPMC8797214 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Expanding testing capabilities is integral to managing the further spread of SARS-CoV-2 and developing reopening strategies, particularly in regards to identifying and isolating asymptomatic and pre-symptomatic individuals. Central to meeting testing demands are specimens that can be easily and reliably collected and laboratory capacity to rapidly ramp up to scale. We and others have demonstrated that high and consistent levels of SARS-CoV-2 RNA can be detected in saliva from COVID-19 inpatients, outpatients, and asymptomatic individuals. As saliva collection is non-invasive, extending this strategy to test pooled saliva samples from multiple individuals could thus provide a simple method to expand testing capacity. However, hesitation towards pooled sample testing arises due to the dilution of positive samples, potentially shifting weakly positive samples below the detection limit for SARS-CoV-2 and thereby decreasing the sensitivity. Here, we investigated the potential of pooling saliva samples by 5, 10, and 20 samples prior to RNA extraction and RT-qPCR detection of SARS-CoV-2. Based on samples tested, we conservatively estimated a reduction of 7.41%, 11.11%, and 14.81% sensitivity, for each of the pool sizes, respectively. Using these estimates we modeled anticipated changes in RT-qPCR cycle threshold to show the practical impact of pooling on results of SARS-CoV-2 testing. In tested populations with greater than 3% prevalence, testing samples in pools of 5 requires the least overall number of tests. Below 1% however, pools of 10 or 20 are more beneficial and likely more supportive of ongoing surveillance strategies.
| S-EPMC7480055 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC8055204 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Most severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) diagnostic tests have relied on RNA extraction followed by reverse transcription quantitative polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR) assays. Whereas automation improved logistics and different pooling strategies increased testing capacity, highly multiplexed next-generation sequencing (NGS) diagnostics remain a largely untapped resource. NGS tests have the potential to markedly increase throughput while providing crucial SARS-CoV-2 variant information. Current NGS-based detection and genotyping assays for SARS-CoV-2 are costly, mostly due to parallel sample processing through multiple steps. Here, we have established ApharSeq, in which samples are barcoded in the lysis buffer and pooled before reverse transcription. We validated this assay by applying ApharSeq to more than 500 clinical samples from the Clinical Virology Laboratory at Hadassah hospital in a robotic workflow. The assay was linear across five orders of magnitude, and the limit of detection was Ct 33 (~1000 copies/ml, 95% sensitivity) with >99.5% specificity. ApharSeq provided targeted high-confidence genotype information due to unique molecular identifiers incorporated into this method. Because of early pooling, we were able to estimate a 10- to 100-fold reduction in labor, automated liquid handling, and reagent requirements in high-throughput settings compared to current testing methods. The protocol can be tailored to assay other host or pathogen RNA targets simultaneously. These results suggest that ApharSeq can be a promising tool for current and future mass diagnostic challenges.
| S-EPMC9928115 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo evaluate the efficacy of sample pooling compared to the individual analysis for the diagnosis of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) by using different commercial platforms for nucleic acid extraction and amplification.MethodsA total of 3519 nasopharyngeal samples received at nine Spanish clinical microbiology laboratories were processed individually and in pools (342 pools of ten samples and 11 pools of nine samples) according to the existing methodology in place at each centre.ResultsWe found that 253 pools (2519 samples) were negative and 99 pools (990 samples) were positive; with 241 positive samples (6.85%), our pooling strategy would have saved 2167 PCR tests. For 29 pools (made out of 290 samples), we found discordant results when compared to their correspondent individual samples, as follows: in 22 of 29 pools (28 samples), minor discordances were found; for seven pools (7 samples), we found major discordances. Sensitivity, specificity and positive and negative predictive values for pooling were 97.10% (95% confidence interval (CI), 94.11-98.82), 100%, 100% and 99.79% (95% CI, 99.56-99.90) respectively; accuracy was 99.80% (95% CI, 99.59-99.92), and the kappa concordant coefficient was 0.984. The dilution of samples in our pooling strategy resulted in a median loss of 2.87 (95% CI, 2.46-3.28) cycle threshold (Ct) for E gene, 3.36 (95% CI, 2.89-3.85) Ct for the RdRP gene and 2.99 (95% CI, 2.56-3.43) Ct for the N gene.ConclusionsWe found a high efficiency of pooling strategies for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) RNA testing across different RNA extraction and amplification platforms, with excellent performance in terms of sensitivity, specificity and positive and negative predictive values.
| S-EPMC7481316 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic has significantly increased demand on laboratory throughput and reagents for nucleic acid extraction and polymerase chain reaction (PCR). Reagent shortages may limit the expansion of testing required to scale back containment measures. The aims of this study were to investigate the viability of sample pooling as a strategy for increasing test throughput and conserving PCR reagents; and to report our early experience with pooling of clinical samples. A pre-implementation study was performed to assess the sensitivity and theoretical efficiency of two, four, and eight-sample pools in a real-time reverse transcription PCR-based workflow. A standard operating procedure was developed and implemented in two laboratories during periods of peak demand, inclusive of over 29,000 clinical samples processed in our laboratory. Sensitivity decreased (mean absolute increase in cycle threshold value of 0.6, 2.3, and 3.0 for pools of two, four, and eight samples, respectively) and efficiency increased as pool size increased. Gains from pooling diminished at high disease prevalence. Our standard operating procedure was successfully implemented across two laboratories. Increased workflow complexity imparts a higher risk of errors, and requires risk mitigation strategies. Turnaround time for individual samples increased, hence urgent samples should not be pooled. Pooling is a viable strategy for high-throughput testing of SARS-CoV-2 in low-prevalence settings.
| S-EPMC7508550 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeThe pandemic of SARS-CoV-2 or COVID-19 has hugely created an economic imbalance worldwide. With the exponential increase in the number of cases and to keep in check on the community transmission, there is high demand and acute shortage of diagnostic kits. The pooled-sample strategy turns out to be the promising strategy intended to determine the optimal testing for specimens with limited resources and without losing the test sensitivity and specificity. The study was performed with standard molecular biology graded lab equipment, FDA-approved COVID-19 RNA extraction, and SARS-CoV-2 tests kits.Materials and methodsThe study aims to comparatively analyze the pooling strategy of the naso-oropharyngeal specimen sample and RNA extracted from the same patient samples in the pool of 3,5, and 8 with no significant loss in test usability. Another primary focus of the study was detection of low or borderline SARS-CoV-2 positives in the pooling strategy. A total of 300 samples (240 positives and 60 negatives) were tested for 3, 5, and 8 pools of specimen samples and RNA elutes.ResultsThe comparative analysis determined the sensitivity for three and five pool strategy to be above 98% and eight pool strategy to be 100%.ConclusionThe RNA elutes pooling strategy concordance rate is better than that of specimen pooling with 100% specificity. Thus, in the substantial crisis of resources with the global pandemic, pooling approaches for SARS-CoV-2 can be practical in a low prevalence rate of 5%.
| S-EPMC9870240 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has revealed the global public health importance of robust diagnostic testing. To overcome the challenge of nucleic acid (NA) extraction and testing kit availability, an efficient method is urgently needed.ObjectivesTo establish an efficient, time and resource-saving and cost-effective methods, and to propose an ad hoc pooling approach for mass screening of SARS-CoV-2.MethodsWe evaluated pooling approach on both direct clinical and NA samples. The standard reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) test of the SARS CoV-2 was employed targeting the nucleocapsid (N) and open reading frame (ORF1ab) genomic region of the virus. The experimental pools were created using SARS CoV-2 positive clinical samples and extracted RNA spiked with up to 9 negative samples. For the direct clinical samples viral NA was extracted from each pool to a final extraction volume of 200μL, and subsequently both samples tested using the SARS CoV-2 RT-PCR assay.ResultsWe found that a single positive sample can be amplified and detected in pools of up to 7 samples depending on the cycle threshold (Ct) value of the original sample, corresponding to high, and low SARS CoV-2 viral copies per reaction. However, to minimize false negativity of the assay with pooling strategies and with unknown false negativity rate of the assay under validation, we recommend pooling of 4/5 in 1 using the standard protocols of the assay, reagents and equipment. The predictive algorithm indicated a pooling ratio of 5 in 1 was expected to retain accuracy of the test irrespective of the Ct value samples spiked, and result in a 137% increase in testing efficiency.ConclusionsThe approaches showed its concept in easily customized and resource-saving manner and would allow expanding of current screening capacities and enable the expansion of detection in the community. We recommend clinical sample pooling of 4 or 5 in 1. However, we don't advise pooling of clinical samples when disease prevalence is greater than 7%; particularly when sample size is large.
| S-EPMC7909632 | biostudies-literature