Comparing Nasopharyngeal and BAL SARS-CoV-2 Assays in Respiratory Failure.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Gao CA
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7781122 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC6236685 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe ideal severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARs-CoV-2) testing method would be accurate and also be patient-performed to reduce exposure to healthcare workers. The aim of this study was to compare patient-performed testing based on a morning saliva sample with the current standard testing method, healthcare worker-collected sampling via a nasopharyngeal swab (NPS).MethodsThis was a prospective single center study which recruited 217 asymptomatic adult male participants in a coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) quarantine center who had tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 8-10 days prior to isolation. Paired NPS and saliva specimens were collected and processed within 5 hours of sample collection. Real time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) targeting Envelope (E) and RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp) genes was performed and the results were compared.ResultsOverall, 160 of the 217 (74%) participants tested positive for COVID-19 based on saliva, NPS, or both testing methods. The detection rate for SARS-CoV-2 was higher in saliva compared to NPS testing (93.1%, 149/160 vs 52.5%, 84/160, P < .001). The concordance between the 2 tests was 45.6% (virus was detected in both saliva and NPS in 73/160), whereas 47.5% were discordant (87/160 tested positive for 1 whereas negative for the other). The cycle threshold (Ct) values for E and RdRp genes were significantly lower in saliva specimens compared to NP swab specimens.ConclusionsOur findings demonstrate that saliva is a better alternative specimen for detection of SARS-CoV-2. Taking into consideration, the simplicity of specimen collection, shortage of PPE and the transmissibility of the virus, saliva could enable self-collection for an accurate SARS-CoV-2 surveillance testing.
| S-EPMC7454325 | biostudies-literature
Project description:In December 2019, a novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) was first isolated from Wuhan city, China and within three months, the global community was challenged with a devastating pandemic. The rapid spread of the virus challenged diagnostic laboratories to rapidly develop molecular diagnostic methods. As SARS CoV-2 assays became available for testing on existing molecular platforms, laboratories devoted unprecedented energy and resources into evaluating the analytical performance of the new tests and in some cases developed their own diagnostic assays under FDA-EUA guidance. This study compares the validation of three different molecular assays at the Johns Hopkins Molecular Virology laboratory: the RealStar® SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR, ePlex® SARS-CoV-2, and the CDC COVID-19 RT-PCR tests. Overall, our studies indicate a comparable analytical performance of the three assays for the detection of SARS-CoV-2.
| S-EPMC7194987 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The rapid scale-up of research on coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has spawned a large number of potential vaccines and immunotherapies, accompanied by a commensurately large number of in vitro assays and in vivo models to measure their effectiveness. These assays broadly have the same end-goal - to predict the clinical efficacy of prophylactic and therapeutic interventions in humans. However, the apparent potency of different interventions can vary considerably between assays and animal models, leading to very different predictions of clinical efficacy. Complete harmonization of experimental methods may be intractable at the current pace of research. However, here we analyse a selection of existing assays for measuring antibody-mediated virus neutralization and animal models of infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and provide a framework for comparing results between studies and reconciling observed differences in the effects of interventions. Finally, we propose how we might optimize these assays for better comparison of results from in vitro and animal studies to accelerate progress.
| S-EPMC7605490 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-BSST1037 | biostudies-other
Project description:Microbiome analysis of oropharyngeal and nasopharyngeal samples of SARS-CoV-2 infected patients
2021-02-06 | GSE166281 | GEO
Project description:Nasopharyngeal RNASeq comparing SARS-CoV-2+ patients and SARS-CoV-2 negative control subjects
| PRJNA730941 | ENA
Project description:Nasopharyngeal RNASeq comparing SARS-CoV-2+ patients and SARS-CoV-2 negative control subjects
| PRJNA730940 | ENA
Project description:The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic caused by SARS-CoV-2 has affected millions of people worldwide and has significant implications for public health. Host transcriptomics profiling provides comprehensive understanding of how the virus interacts with host cells and how the host responds to the virus. COVID-19 disease alters the host transcriptome, affecting cellular pathways and key molecular functions. To contribute to the global effort to understand the virus’s effect on host cell transcriptome, we have generated a dataset from nasopharyngeal swabs of 35 individuals infected with SARS-CoV-2 from the Campania region in Italy during the three outbreaks, with different clinical conditions. This dataset will help to elucidate the complex interactions among genes and can be useful in the development of effective therapeutic pathways
2023-05-25 | E-MTAB-13028 | biostudies-arrayexpress
Project description:BackgroundThe ongoing coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic has major impacts on health systems, the economy and society. Assessing infection attack rates in the population is critical for estimating disease severity and herd immunity which is needed to calibrate public health interventions. We have previously shown that it is possible to achieve this in real time to impact public health decision making.AimOur objective was to develop and evaluate serological assays applicable in large-scale sero-epidemiological studies.MethodsWe developed an ELISA to detect IgG and IgM antibodies to the receptor-binding domain (RBD) of the spike protein of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). We evaluated its sensitivity and specificity in combination with confirmatory microneutralisation (MN) and 90% plaque reduction neutralisation tests (PRNT90) in 51 sera from 24 patients with virologically confirmed COVID-19 and in age-stratified sera from 200 healthy controls.ResultsIgG and IgM RBD ELISA, MN and PRNT90 were reliably positive after 29 days from illness onset with no detectable cross-reactivity in age-stratified controls. We found that PRNT90 tests were more sensitive in detecting antibody than MN tests carried out with the conventional 100 tissue culture infectious dose challenge. Heparinised plasma appeared to reduce the infectivity of the virus challenge dose and may confound interpretation of neutralisation test.ConclusionUsing IgG ELISA based on the RBD of the spike protein to screen sera for SARS-CoV-2 antibody, followed by confirmation using PRNT90, is a valid approach for large-scale sero-epidemiology studies.
| S-EPMC7189648 | biostudies-literature