Dataset Information

SARS-CoV-2: Comparative analysis of different RNA extraction methods.

ABSTRACT: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is the etiologic agent of the COVID-19 pandemic. Although other diagnostic methods have been introduced, detection of viral genes on oro- and nasopharyngeal swabs by reverse-transcription real time-PCR (rRT-PCR) assays is still the gold standard. Efficient viral RNA extraction is a prerequisite for downstream performance of rRT-PCR assays. Currently, several automatic methods that include RNA extraction are available. However, due to the growing demand, a shortage in kit supplies could be experienced in several labs. For these reasons, the use of different commercial or in-house protocols for RNA extraction may increase the possibility to analyze high number of samples. Herein, we compared the efficiency of RNA extraction of three different commercial kits and an in-house extraction protocol using synthetic ssRNA standards of SARS-CoV-2 as well as in oro-nasopharyngeal swabs from six COVID-19-positive patients. It was concluded that tested commercial kits can be used with some modifications for the detection of the SARS-CoV-2 genome by rRT-PCR approaches, although with some differences in RNA yields. Conversely, EXTRAzol reagent was the less efficient due to the phase separation principle at the basis of RNA extraction. Overall, this study offers alternative suitable methods to manually extract RNA that can be taken into account for SARS-CoV-2 detection.

SUBMITTER: Ambrosi C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7640895 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

SARS-CoV-2: Comparative analysis of different RNA extraction methods.

Ambrosi Cecilia C Prezioso Carla C Checconi Paola P Scribano Daniela D Sarshar Meysam M Capannari Maurizio M Tomino Carlo C Fini Massimo M Garaci Enrico E Palamara Anna Teresa AT De Chiara Giovanna G Limongi Dolores D

Journal of virological methods 20201104

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is the etiologic agent of the COVID-19 pandemic. Although other diagnostic methods have been introduced, detection of viral genes on oro- and nasopharyngeal swabs by reverse-transcription real time-PCR (rRT-PCR) assays is still the gold standard. Efficient viral RNA extraction is a prerequisite for downstream performance of rRT-PCR assays. Currently, several automatic methods that include RNA extraction are available. However, due to t ...[more]

PMID: 33160015

Similar Datasets

Project description:The gold standard for the laboratory diagnosis of COVID-19 is the reverse transcription quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR) assay, which searches for SARS-CoV-2 target genes in nasopharyngeal/oropharyngeal (NP/OP) samples, and its performance depends on the quantity and quality of the RNA input. This study compared the performance and cost-effectiveness of three different kits/reagents for RNA extraction used in COVID-19 diagnosis in Sao Paulo, Brazil. A total of 300 NP/OP samples belonging to suspected cases of COVID-19 stored in a biorepository were randomly selected, and RNA was extracted using (i) automated extraction (Loccus, Extracta Kit FAST), (ii) manual extraction (BioGene Kit, Bioclin, Quibasa), and (iii) quick extraction methods (Lucigen, Quick DNA Extract Kit). Next, the samples were tested using RT-qPCR for SARS-CoV-2 with the Allplex 2019-nCoV modified assay and the Charité-Berlin protocol. All assays/kits were used according to the manufacturer's instructions. For the Allplex kit, the sensitivity in detecting SARS-CoV-2 with previously extracted RNA by different procedures was 100.0% for Loccus, 100.0% for BioGene and 91.9% for Quick. Using the Charité-Berlin protocol, the sensitivities were 81.4% for Loccus, 81.2% for BioGene and 60.7% for Quick. The least sensitive target gene and the gene most affected by RNA extraction procedures was the RNA-dependent RNA polymerase gene (Charité-Berlin protocol). No false-positive SARS-CoV-2 results were detected using RNA obtained from any of the different protocols. In conclusion, Loccus and BioGene RNA extractions were efficient for RT-qPCR assays, and although the BioGene procedure is less expensive, Loccus is the best choice because it allows the rapid handling of hundreds or thousands of samples, a desirable feature during pandemics. Although less sensitive, the Quick extraction is useful during outbreaks coupled with the Allplex amplification kit for SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis (κ = 0.925).

Dataset Information

SARS-CoV-2: Comparative analysis of different RNA extraction methods.

Publications

SARS-CoV-2: Comparative analysis of different RNA extraction methods.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets