Browse
Submit Data
Databases
API
Help

Dataset Information

18 Views

0 Connections

0 Citations

0 Reanalyses

0 Downloads

Omics score: 0

A blueprint for academic laboratories to produce SARS-CoV-2 quantitative RT-PCR test kits.

ABSTRACT: Widespread testing for the presence of the novel coronavirus severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in individuals remains vital for controlling the COVID-19 pandemic prior to the advent of an effective treatment. Challenges in testing can be traced to an initial shortage of supplies, expertise, and/or instrumentation necessary to detect the virus by quantitative RT-PCR (RT-qPCR), the most robust, sensitive, and specific assay currently available. Here we show that academic biochemistry and molecular biology laboratories equipped with appropriate expertise and infrastructure can replicate commercially available SARS-CoV-2 RT-qPCR test kits and backfill pipeline shortages. The Georgia Tech COVID-19 Test Kit Support Group, composed of faculty, staff, and trainees across the biotechnology quad at Georgia Institute of Technology, synthesized multiplexed primers and probes and formulated a master mix composed of enzymes and proteins produced in-house. Our in-house kit compares favorably with a commercial product used for diagnostic testing. We also developed an environmental testing protocol to readily monitor surfaces for the presence of SARS-CoV-2. Our blueprint should be readily reproducible by research teams at other institutions, and our protocols may be modified and adapted to enable SARS-CoV-2 detection in more resource-limited settings.

SUBMITTER: Mascuch SJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7667971 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Json Xml

Similar Datasets

A blueprint for academic labs to produce SARS-CoV-2 RT-qPCR test kits.

Project description:Widespread testing for the presence of the novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 in individuals remains vital for controlling the COVID-19 pandemic prior to the advent of an effective treatment. Challenges in testing can be traced to an initial shortage of supplies, expertise and/or instrumentation necessary to detect the virus by quantitative reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR), the most robust, sensitive, and specific assay currently available. Here we show that academic biochemistry and molecular biology laboratories equipped with appropriate expertise and infrastructure can replicate commercially available SARS-CoV-2 RT-qPCR test kits and backfill pipeline shortages. The Georgia Tech COVID-19 Test Kit Support Group, composed of faculty, staff, and trainees across the biotechnology quad at Georgia Institute of Technology, synthesized multiplexed primers and probes and formulated a master mix composed of enzymes and proteins produced in-house. Our in-house kit compares favorably to a commercial product used for diagnostic testing. We also developed an environmental testing protocol to readily monitor surfaces across various campus laboratories for the presence of SARS-CoV-2. Our blueprint should be readily reproducible by research teams at other institutions, and our protocols may be modified and adapted to enable SARS-CoV-2 detection in more resource-limited settings.

| S-EPMC7402063 | biostudies-literature

Serum miRNA profiling by quantitative RT PCR [RT-PCR Array 1]

Project description:Initial screening, the expression of 125 mature miRNA was compared between pooled control and autism samples by two microarray analysis. The differential expression of 14 miRNA was further validated by SYBR green quantitative PCR of Individual samples. Thirteen miRNAs were differetially expressed in autistic individuals compared to the controls (8 upregulated and 5 down regulated). miR-151a-3p, miR-181b-5p, miR-320a, miR-328, miR-433, miR-489, miR-572, and miR-663a were downregulated, while miR-101-3p, miR-106b-5p, miR-130a-3p, miR-195-5p, and miR-19b-3p were upregulated. We have identified a set of serum miRNAs that could be used as non-invasive biomarkers for autism.

2014-06-27 | GSE58847 | GEO

Serum miRNA profiling by quantitative RT PCR [RT-PCR Array 2]

2014-06-27 | GSE58848 | GEO

Establishment of a quantitative RT-PCR detection of SARS-CoV-2 virus.

Project description:BackgroundThe outbreak of novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has become a public health emergency of international concern. Quantitative testing of SARS-CoV-2 (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2) virus is demanded in evaluating the efficacy of antiviral drugs and vaccines and RT-PCR can be widely deployed in the clinical assay of viral loads. Here, we developed a quantitative RT-PCR method for SARS-CoV-2 virus detection in this study.MethodsRT-PCR kits targeting E (envelope) gene, N (nucleocapsid) gene and RdRP (RNA-dependent RNA polymerase) gene of SARS-CoV-2 from Roche Diagnostics were evaluated and E gene kit was employed for quantitative detection of COVID-19 virus using Cobas Z480. Viral load was calculated according to the standard curve established by series dilution of an E-gene RNA standard provided by Tib-Molbiol (a division of Roche Diagnostics). Assay performance was evaluated.ResultsThe performance of the assay is acceptable with limit of detection (LOD) below 10E1 copies/μL and lower limit of quantification (LLOQ) as 10E2 copies/μL.ConclusionA quantitative detection of the COVID-19 virus based on RT-PCR was established.

| S-EPMC8677905 | biostudies-literature

Comparison of seven commercial RT-PCR diagnostic kits for COVID-19.

Project description:The final months of 2019 witnessed the emergence of a novel coronavirus in the human population. Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has since spread across the globe and is posing a major burden on society. Measures taken to reduce its spread critically depend on timely and accurate identification of virus-infected individuals by the most sensitive and specific method available, i.e. real-time reverse transcriptase PCR (RT-PCR). Many commercial kits have recently become available, but their performance has not yet been independently assessed. The aim of this study was to compare basic analytical and clinical performance of selected RT-PCR kits from seven different manufacturers (Altona Diagnostics, BGI, CerTest Biotec, KH Medical, PrimerDesign, R-Biopharm AG, and Seegene). We used serial dilutions of viral RNA to establish PCR efficiency and estimate the 95 % limit of detection (LOD95). Furthermore, we ran a panel of SARS-CoV-2-positive clinical samples (n = 13) for a preliminary evaluation of clinical sensitivity. Finally, we used clinical samples positive for non-coronavirus respiratory viral infections (n = 6) and a panel of RNA from related human coronaviruses to evaluate assay specificity. PCR efficiency was ≥96 % for all assays and the estimated LOD95 varied within a 6-fold range. Using clinical samples, we observed some variations in detection rate between kits. Importantly, none of the assays showed cross-reactivity with other respiratory (corona)viruses, except as expected for the SARS-CoV-1 E-gene. We conclude that all RT-PCR kits assessed in this study may be used for routine diagnostics of COVID-19 in patients by experienced molecular diagnostic laboratories.

| S-EPMC7206434 | biostudies-literature

Estimating the false-negative test probability of SARS-CoV-2 by RT-PCR.

Project description:BackgroundReverse-transcription PCR (RT-PCR) assays are used to test for infection with the SARS-CoV-2 virus. RT-PCR tests are highly specific and the probability of false positives is low, but false negatives are possible depending on swab type and time since symptom onset.AimTo determine how the probability of obtaining a false-negative test in infected patients is affected by time since symptom onset and swab type.MethodsWe used generalised additive mixed models to analyse publicly available data from patients who received multiple RT-PCR tests and were identified as SARS-CoV-2 positive at least once.ResultsThe probability of a positive test decreased with time since symptom onset, with oropharyngeal (OP) samples less likely to yield a positive result than nasopharyngeal (NP) samples. The probability of incorrectly identifying an uninfected individual due to a false-negative test was considerably reduced if negative tests were repeated 24 hours later. For a small false-positive test probability (<0.5%), the true number of infected individuals was larger than the number of positive tests. For a higher false-positive test probability, the true number of infected individuals was smaller than the number of positive tests.ConclusionNP samples are more sensitive than OP samples. The later an infected individual is tested after symptom onset, the less likely they are to test positive. This has implications for identifying infected patients, contact tracing and discharging convalescing patients who are potentially still infectious.

| S-EPMC7812420 | biostudies-literature

Sensitivity evaluation of 2019 novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) RT-PCR detection kits and strategy to reduce false negative.

Project description:The early detection and differential diagnosis of respiratory infections increase the chances for successful control of COVID-19 disease. The nucleic acid RT-PCR test is regarded as the current standard for molecular diagnosis. However, the maximal specificity confirmation target ORF1ab gene is considered to be less sensitive than other targets in clinical application. In addition, recent evidence indicated that the initial missed diagnosis of asymptomatic patients with SARS-CoV-2 and discharged patients with "re-examination positive" might be due to low viral load, and the ability of rapid mutation of SARS-CoV-2 also increases the rate of false-negative results. Moreover, the mixed sample nucleic acid detection is helpful in seeking out the early community transmission of SARS-CoV-2 rapidly, but the detection kit needs ultra-high detection sensitivity. Herein, the lowest detection concentration of different nucleic acid detection kits was evaluated and compared to provide direct evidence for the selection of kits for mixed sample detection or make recommendations for the selection of validation kit, which is of great significance for the prevention and control of the current epidemic and the discharge criteria of low viral load patients.

| S-EPMC7673793 | biostudies-literature

Diagnosing the novel SARS-CoV-2 by quantitative RT-PCR: variations and opportunities.

Project description:The world is currently facing a novel viral pandemic (SARS-CoV-2), and large-scale testing is central to decision-making for the design of effective policies and control strategies to minimize its impact on the global population. However, testing for the presence of the virus is a major bottleneck in tracking the spreading of the disease. Given its adaptability regarding the nucleotide sequence of target regions, RT-qPCR is a strong ally to reveal the rapid geographical spreading of novel viruses. We assessed PCR variations in the SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis taking into account public genome sequences and diagnosis kits used by different countries. We analyzed 226 SARS-CoV-2 genome sequences from samples collected by March 22, 2020. Our work utilizes a phylogenetic approach that reveals the early evolution of the virus sequence as it spreads around the globe and informs the design of RT-qPCR primers and probes. The quick expansion of testing capabilities of a country during a pandemic is largely impaired by the availability of adequately trained personnel on RNA isolation and PCR analysis, as well as the availability of hardware (thermocyclers). We propose that rapid capacity development can circumvent these bottlenecks by training medical and non-medical personnel with some laboratory experience, such as biology-related graduate students. Furthermore, the use of thermocyclers available in academic and commercial labs can be promptly calibrated and certified to properly conduct testing during a pandemic. A decentralized, fast-acting training and testing certification pipeline will better prepare us to manage future pandemics.

| S-EPMC7567654 | biostudies-literature

Comparison of the diagnostic efficacy between two PCR test kits for SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid detection.

Project description:BACKGROUND:To compare the diagnostic efficacy between two different real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) test kits for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) nucleic acid detection and provide references for laboratories. METHODS:Throat swab samples from 18 hospitalized patients were clinically diagnosed with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and 100 hospitalized patients without COVID-19 were collected. SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid was detected in throat swab samples with RT-PCR test kits from Sansure Biotech Inc (Hunan, China) and Shanghai BioGerm Medical Biotechnology Co., Ltd.(Shanghai, China). The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and kappa value were analyzed, and three parallel tests were performed with three weakly positive samples. RESULTS:The sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV, and kappa value of the Sansure PCR kit were 0.833, 1.000, 1.000, 0.971, and 0.894, respectively, and the sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV, and kappa value of the BioGerm PCR kit were 0.944, 1.000, 1.000, 0.990, and 0.966, respectively. For the three parallel tests, the coefficient of variation value of the BioGerm PCR kit in all three samples was the smallest for both the ORF1ab and N gene. CONCLUSION:The detection efficacy of the BioGerm PCR kit for SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid detection was relatively higher than that of the Sansure PCR kit.

| S-EPMC7536918 | biostudies-literature

Real-life clinical sensitivity of SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR test in symptomatic patients.

Project description:BackgroundUnderstanding the false negative rates of SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR testing is pivotal for the management of the COVID-19 pandemic and it has implications for patient management. Our aim was to determine the real-life clinical sensitivity of SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR.MethodsThis population-based retrospective study was conducted in March-April 2020 in the Helsinki Capital Region, Finland. Adults who were clinically suspected of SARS-CoV-2 infection and underwent SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR testing, with sufficient data in their medical records for grading of clinical suspicion were eligible. In addition to examining the first RT-PCR test of repeat-tested individuals, we also used high clinical suspicion for COVID-19 as the reference standard for calculating the sensitivity of SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR.ResultsAll 1,194 inpatients (mean [SD] age, 63.2 [18.3] years; 45.2% women) admitted to COVID-19 cohort wards during the study period were included. The outpatient cohort of 1,814 individuals (mean [SD] age, 45.4 [17.2] years; 69.1% women) was sampled from epidemiological line lists by systematic quasi-random sampling. The sensitivity (95% CI) for laboratory confirmed cases (repeat-tested patients) was 85.7% (81.5-89.1%) inpatients; 95.5% (92.2-97.5%) outpatients, 89.9% (88.2-92.1%) all. When also patients that were graded as high suspicion but never tested positive were included in the denominator, the sensitivity (95% CI) was: 67.5% (62.9-71.9%) inpatients; 34.9% (31.4-38.5%) outpatients; 47.3% (44.4-50.3%) all.ConclusionsThe clinical sensitivity of SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR testing was only moderate at best. The relatively high false negative rates of SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR testing need to be accounted for in clinical decision making, epidemiological interpretations, and when using RT-PCR as a reference for other tests.

| S-EPMC8139477 | biostudies-literature

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

OmicsDI is an Elixir interoperability service. Learn more ›

OmicsDI Databases

PRIDE
PeptideAtlas
MassIVE
JPOST Repository
Physiome Model Repository

EGA
EVA
ENA
LINCS
PAXDB
Cell Collective

MetaboLights
Metabolomics Workbench
MetabolomeExpress
GNPS
BioModels
FAIRDOMHub

ArrayExpress
dbGaP
ExpressionAtlas
GEO
NODE

Information

Databases
Help
API
Contact us
Code on GitHub
Terms of use
Submit Data