Analytical and clinical comparison of Viasure (CerTest Biotec) and 2019-nCoV CDC (IDT) RT-qPCR kits for SARS-CoV2 diagnosis.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Background
Several RT-qPCR kits are available for SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis, some of them with Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) by FDA, but most of them lacking of proper evaluation studies due to covid19 emergency.Objective
We evaluated Viasure RT-qPCR kit (CerTest Biotec, Spain) for SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis using FDA EUA 2019-nCoV CDC kit (IDT, USA) as a gold standard.Results
Although we found the lack of RNA quality control probe as the main limitation for the Viasure kit, the sensitivity was 91.9% and the specificity was 100%. The limit of detection (LOD) was 2000 copies/mL and 1000 copies/mL for Viasure and IDT kits, respectively.Conclusions
Viasure RT-qPCR kit is a reliable tool for SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis but improvement of an alternative RT-qPCR reaction for RNA extraction quality control as RNaseP is recommended.
SUBMITTER: Freire-Paspuel B
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7673214 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:At the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) designed, manufactured, and distributed the CDC 2019-Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel for SARS-CoV-2 detection. The diagnostic panel targeted three viral nucleocapsid gene loci (N1, N2, and N3 primers and probes) to maximize sensitivity and to provide redundancy for virus detection if mutations occurred. After the first distribution of the diagnostic panel, state public health laboratories reported fluorescent signal in the absence of viral template (false-positive reactivity) for the N3 component and to a lesser extent for N1. This report describes the findings of an internal investigation conducted by the CDC to identify the cause(s) of the N1 and N3 false-positive reactivity. For N1, results demonstrate that contamination with a synthetic template, that occurred while the "bulk" manufactured materials were located in a research lab for quality assessment, was the cause of false reactivity in the first lot. Base pairing between the 3' end of the N3 probe and the 3' end of the N3 reverse primer led to amplification of duplex and larger molecules resulting in false reactivity in the N3 assay component. We conclude that flaws in both assay design and handling of the "bulk" material, caused the problems with the first lot of the 2019-nCoV Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel. In addition, within this study, we found that the age of the examined diagnostic panel reagents increases the frequency of false positive results for N3. We discuss these findings in the context of improvements to quality control, quality assurance, and assay validation practices that have since been improved at the CDC.
| S-EPMC8673615 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundSeveral RT-qPCR kits are available for SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis and some have emergency use authorization from the US Food and Drug Administration. In particular, the nCoV19 CDC kit includes two targets for detecting SARS-CoV-2 (N1 and N2) and an RNaseP (RP) target for RNA extraction quality control, all of which are labeled with FAM, and thus three PCR reactions are required per sample.MethodsWe designed a triplex RT-qPCR assay based on nCoV19 primers and probes where N1, N2, and RP are labeled with FAM, HEX, and Cy5, respectively, so only a single PCR reaction is required for each sample for SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis.ResultsIn total, 172 samples were analyzed in both singleplex and triplex assays, where 86 samples tested SARS-CoV-2 negative with both assays, so the triplex assay specificity was 100%. In addition, 86 samples tested SARS-Co-V 2 positive with the singleplex assay and 84 with the triplex assay, so the sensitivity was 97.7%. The limit of detection for the triplex assay was determined as 1000 copies/mL.ConclusionsThis new triplex RT-qPCR assay based on primers and probes from the CDC protocol is highly reliable for SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis, and it could speed up detection and save reagents during the current SARS-CoV-2 testing supplies shortage.
| S-EPMC7585718 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundMultiple RT-qPCR kits are available in the market for SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis, some of them with Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) by FDA or their country of origin agency, but many of them lack of proper clinical evaluation.ObjectiveWe evaluated the clinical performance of two Korean SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR kits available in South America, AccuPower SARS-CoV-2 Multiplex RT-PCR kit (Bioneer, South Korea) and Allplex 2019-nCoV Assay (Seegene, South Korea), for RT-qPCR SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis using the CDC protocol as a gold standard.ResultsWe found strong differences among both kits clinical performance and analytical sensitivity; while the Allplex 2019-nCoV Assay has sensitivity of 96.5% and an estimated limit of detection of 4,000 copies/ml, the AccuPower SARS-CoV-2 Multiplex RT-PCR kit has a sensitivity of 75.5% and limit of detection estimated to be bigger than 20,000 copies/ml.ConclusionsAccuPower SARS-CoV-2 Multiplex RT-PCR kit and Allplex 2019-nCoV Assay are both made in South Korea but EUA by Korean CDC was only granted to the later. Our results support that Korean CDC EUA should be considered as a quality control proxy for Korean SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR kits prior to importation by developing countries to guarantee high sensitivity diagnosis.
| S-EPMC8223252 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The ongoing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has become a public health emergency. Although many reverse-transcription PCR (RT-PCR) assays have been developed, their performance, especially sensitivity assessment, has been insufficiently tested. In this study, a preliminary comparison of the analytical sensitivity of nine RT-qPCR kits from different manufacturers was first conducted using a certified reference material derived from the genomic RNA of SARS-CoV-2 as the template. Subsequently, three of the nine kits, comprising two highly sensitive kits (DAAN, Huirui) and one less sensitive kit (Geneodx), were selected for further sensitivity and specificity validation. The results revealed variations in the performance between kits of the two groups. For the two highly sensitive kits, the limits of detection at 95 % probability (LOD95%) were 5.6 copies of the N gene and 3.5 copies of the ORF 1ab per reaction (DAAN), and 6.4 (N) and 4.6 (ORF 1ab) copies per reaction (Huirui). These LOD95% values were approximately 3 to 4-fold better than those of the Geneodx Kit. However, none of these three Kits showed cross-reactivity against 6 other types of human coronaviruses or respiratory viruses. Because most of these commercial kits are approved as in vitro diagnostics (testing specimens without direct human contact), it would be beneficial for their manufacturers to improve the diagnostic capability of these kits and thus reduce the clinical risks associated with false-negative results.
| S-EPMC8434693 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The ongoing outbreak of the recently emerged novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) poses a challenge for public health laboratories as virus isolates are unavailable while there is growing evidence that the outbreak is more widespread than initially thought, and international spread through travellers does already occur. We aimed to develop and deploy robust diagnostic methodology for use in public health laboratory settings without having virus material available. Here we present a validated diagnostic workflow for 2019-nCoV, its design relying on close genetic relatedness of 2019-nCoV with SARS coronavirus, making use of synthetic nucleic acid technology. The workflow reliably detects 2019-nCoV, and further discriminates 2019-nCoV from SARS-CoV. Through coordination between academic and public laboratories, we confirmed assay exclusivity based on 297 original clinical specimens containing a full spectrum of human respiratory viruses. Control material is made available through European Virus Archive - Global (EVAg), a European Union infrastructure project. The present study demonstrates the enormous response capacity achieved through coordination of academic and public laboratories in national and European research networks.
| S-EPMC6988269 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), which has caused a global pandemic beginning in 2020, can be detected by reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR). However, owing to the urgent need for a large number of detection kits, the time spent researching and developing these kits has been shortened during the pandemic, and the kits that are being used commercially have not undergone full and independent evaluation. To ensure the accuracy of SARS-CoV-2 test results, performance verification of commercial Real-Time quantitative PCR (RT-qPCR) kits is required.MethodsThe performance of five commercial RT-qPCR diagnostic kits for SARS-CoV-2 used in China was evaluated using a coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) RNA liquid performance verification reference product-manufactured by Guangzhou Bondson (BDS) Biotechnology Co., Ltd.,Guangzhou, China-that uses droplet digital RT-PCR technology combined with fluorescence quantitative PCR. The five kits of Novel Coronavirus 2019-nCoV nucleic acid detection kit (RT-qPCR method) evaluated were Da An (Da An Gene Co., Ltd. of Sun Yat-sen University), Liferiver (Shanghai ZJ Bio-Tech Co., Ltd.), Kinghawk (Beijing Kinghawk Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd.), eDiagnosis (Wuhan Easy Diagnosis Biomedicine Co., Ltd.), and Maccura (Maccura Biotechnology Co., Ltd.). Performance verification criteria included the coincidence rate, limit of detection (LoD), cross-reactivity, precision, and anti-interference. Finally, through the BDS performance verification reference product kit, clinical samples are used to verify its clinical diagnostic efficacy.ResultsThe coincidence rate was 100% for all kits except for Kinghawk, which was 95%. The LoD for Da An, eDiagnosis and Maccura was 250copies/mL, and it was 1000 copies/ml for Liferiver. Kinghawk was not able to detect its advertised LoD of 500 copies/ml. The cross-reactivity test results were all negative. Moreover, all kits had a coefficient of variation less than 5%; however, Liferiver showed the best precision. Da An, Liferiver, and eDiagnosis showed higher sensitivity to the nucleocapsid (N) gene than they did to the open reading frame (ORF) 1ab genes. Anti-interference results for all five kits were positive. The results of clinical diagnostic efficacy were that the specificity of the four kits was 1.000 (0.877-1.000), the sensitivity of Da An was 1.000 (0.850-1.000), Liferiver was 0.964 (0.798-0.998), Maccura was 0.893 (0.706-0.972), and eDiagnosis was 0.857 (0.664-0.953).ConclusionsAll commercial RT-qPCR diagnostic kits for SARS-CoV-2 passed the BDS performance verification, except for Kinghawk (batch No:20200608113) which failed to detect the LoD of 500 copies/mL. Da An and Liferiver have excellent clinical diagnostic specificity and sensitivity. This study can provide guidance for the selection or optimization of RT-qPCR diagnostic test kits for SARS-CoV-2.
| S-EPMC8662914 | biostudies-literature
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
Project description:The rapid spread of the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has led the world to a pandemic. Therefore, rapid, sensitive, and reproducible diagnostic tests are essential to indicate which measures should be taken during pandemics. We retrospectively tested unextracted nasopharyngeal samples from consecutive patients with suspected SARS-CoV-2 infection (n = 334), and compared two different Ct cut-off values for interpretation of results using a modified Allplex protocol. Its performance was evaluated using the USA Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) as reference. The reduction on Ct cut-off to 35 increased the test NPA from 79.65 to 88.00 %, reducing the number of false positives, from 10.48 to 6.29 %, resulting in an almost perfect agreement between the Allplex and the CDC protocol (Cohen's Kappa coefficient = 0.830 ± 0.032). This study demonstrates that the Seegene Allplex™ 2019-nCoV protocol skipping the viral RNA extraction step using the Ct cut-off of 35 is a rapid and efficient method to detect SARS-CoV-2 in nasopharyngeal samples.
| S-EPMC8668600 | biostudies-literature
Project description:MicroRNAs regulate gene expression at the post-transcriptional level. Differential expression of miRNAs can potentially be used as biomarkers for early diagnosis and prediction for outcomes. Failure in validation of miRNA profiles is often caused by variations in experimental parameters. In this study, the performance of five extraction kits and three RT-qPCR systems were evaluated using BioMark high-throughput platform and the effects of different experimental parameters on circulating miRNA levels were determined. Differences in the performance of extraction kits as well as varying accuracy, sensitivity and reproducibility in qPCR systems were observed. Normalisation of RT-qPCR data to spike-in controls can reduce extraction bias. However, the extent of correlation for different qPCR systems varies in different assays. At different time points, there was no significant fold change in eight of the plasma miRNAs that we evaluated. Higher level of miRNAs was detected in plasma as compared to serum of the same cohort. In summary, we demonstrated that high-throughput RT-qPCR with pre-amplification step had increased sensitivity and can be achieved with accuracy and high reproducibility through stringent experimental controls. The information provided here is useful for planning biomarker validation studies involving circulating miRNAs.
| S-EPMC4371102 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The recent spread of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) exemplifies the critical need for accurate and rapid diagnostic assays to prompt clinical and public health interventions. Currently, several quantitative reverse transcription-PCR (RT-qPCR) assays are being used by clinical, research and public health laboratories. However, it is currently unclear whether results from different tests are comparable. Our goal was to make independent evaluations of primer-probe sets used in four common SARS-CoV-2 diagnostic assays. From our comparisons of RT-qPCR analytical efficiency and sensitivity, we show that all primer-probe sets can be used to detect SARS-CoV-2 at 500 viral RNA copies per reaction. The exception for this is the RdRp-SARSr (Charité) confirmatory primer-probe set which has low sensitivity, probably due to a mismatch to circulating SARS-CoV-2 in the reverse primer. We did not find evidence for background amplification with pre-COVID-19 samples or recent SARS-CoV-2 evolution decreasing sensitivity. Our recommendation for SARS-CoV-2 diagnostic testing is to select an assay with high sensitivity and that is regionally used, to ease comparability between outcomes.
| S-EPMC9241364 | biostudies-literature