Follow-up testing of borderline SARS-CoV-2 patients by rRT-PCR allows early diagnosis of COVID-19.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Boeckmans J
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7891066 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:By analyzing COVID-19 sequential COVID-19 test results of patients across the United States, we herein attempt to quantify some of the observations we've made around long-term infection (and false-positive rates), as well as provide observations on the uncertainty of sampling variability and other dynamics of COVID-19 infection in the United States. Retrospective cohort study of a registry of RT-PCR testing results for all patients tested at any of the reference labs operated by Labcorp® including both positive, negative, and inconclusive results, from March 1, 2020 to January 28, 2021, including patients from all 50 states and outlying US territories. The study included 22 million patients with RT-PCR qualitative test results for SARS-CoV-2, of which 3.9 million had more than one test at Labcorp. We observed a minuscule <0.1% basal positive rate for follow up tests >115 days, which could account for false positives, long-haulers, and/or reinfection but is indistinguishable in the data. In observing repeat-testing, for patients who have a second test after a first RT-PCR, 30% across the cohort tested negative on the second test. For patients who test positive first and subsequently negative within 96 h (40% of positive test results), 18% of tests will subsequently test positive within another 96-h span. For those who first test negative and then positive within 96 h (2.3% of negative tests), 56% will test negative after a third and subsequent 96-h period. The sudden changes in RT-PCR test results for SARS-CoV-2 from this large cohort study suggest that negative test results during active infection or exposure can change rapidly within just days or hours. We also demonstrate that there does not appear to be a basal false positive rate among patients who test positive >115 days after their first RT-PCR positive test while failing to observe any evidence of widespread reinfection.
| S-EPMC8200821 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Borderline ovarian tumors represent a heterogeneous group of noninvasive tumors of uncertain malignant potential with characteristic histology. They occur in younger women, are present at an early stage, and have a favorable prognosis, but symptomatic recurrence and death may be found as long as 20 years after therapy in some patients. The molecular changes in borderline ovarian tumors indicate linkage of this disease to type I ovarian tumors (low-grade ovarian carcinomas). The pathological stage of disease and subclassification of extraovarian disease into invasive and noninvasive implants, together with the presence of postoperative macroscopic residual disease, appear to be the major predictor of recurrence and survival. However, it should be emphasized that the most important negative prognostic factor for recurrence is just the use of conservative surgery, but without any impact on patient survival because most recurrent diseases are of the borderline type-easily curable and with an excellent prognosis. Borderline tumors are difficult masses to correctly preoperatively diagnose using imaging methods because their macroscopic features may overlap with invasive and benign ovarian tumors. Over the past several decades, surgical therapy has shifted from a radical approach to more conservative treatment; however, oncologic safety must always be balanced. Follow-up is essential using routine ultrasound imaging, with special attention paid to the remaining ovary in conservatively treated patients. Current literature on this topic leads to a number of controversies that will be discussed thoroughly in this article, with the aim to provide recommendations for the clinical management of these patients.
| S-EPMC3528384 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC7262033 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Emerging severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) variants with enhanced transmissibility, pathogenicity, and immune escape ability have ravaged many countries and regions, which has brought substantial challenges to pandemic prevention and control. Real-time reverse transcriptase PCR (rRT-PCR) is widely used for SARS-CoV-2 detection but may be limited by the continuous evolution of the virus. However, the sensitivity of Chinese commercial rRT-PCR kits to critical SARS-CoV-2 variants remains unknown. In this study, contrived MS2 virus-like particles were used as reference materials to evaluate the analytical sensitivity of Daan, BioGerm, EasyDiagnosis, Liferiver, and Sansure kits when detecting six important variants (Alpha, Beta, Gamma, Delta, Omicron, and Fin-796H). The Beta and Delta variants adversely affected the analytical sensitivity of the BioGerm ORF1ab gene assay (9.52% versus 42.96%, P = 0.014, and 14.29% versus 42.96%, P = 0.040, respectively), whereas the N gene assay completely failed in terms of the Fin-796H variant. The Gamma and Fin-796H variants impeded the PCR amplification efficiency for the Sansure ORF1ab gene assay (33.33% versus 66.67%, P = 0.031, and 66.67% versus 95.24%, P = 0.040, respectively), and the Delta variant compromised the E gene assay (52.38% versus 85.71%, P = 0.019). The Alpha and Omicron variants had no significant effect on the kits. This study highlights the necessity of identifying the potential effect of viral mutations on the efficacy and sensitivity of clinical detection assays. It can also provide helpful insights regarding the development and optimization of diagnostic assays and aid the strategic management of the ongoing pandemic.
| S-EPMC9020341 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAn appropriate specimen is of paramount importance in Real Time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR) based diagnosis of novel coronavirus (nCoV) disease (COVID-19). Thus, it's pertinent to evaluate various diversified clinical specimens' diagnostic utility in both diagnosis and follow-up of COVID-19.MethodsA total of 924 initial specimens from 130 COVID-19 symptomatic cases before initiation of treatment and 665 follow up specimens from 15 randomly selected cases comprising of equal number of nasopharyngeal swab (NPS), oropharyngeal swab (OPS), combined NPS and OPS (Combined swab), sputum, plasma, serum and urine were evaluated by rRT-PCR.ResultsDemographic analysis showed males (86) twice more affected by COVID-19 than females (44) (p = 0.00001). Combined swabs showed a positivity rate of 100% followed by NPS (91.5%), OPS (72.3%), sputum (63%), while nCoV was found undetected in urine, plasma and serum specimens. The lowest cycle threshold (Ct) values of targeted genes E, ORF1b and RdRP are 10.56, 10.14 and 12.26 respectively and their lowest average Ct values were found in combined swab which indicates high viral load in combined swab among all other specimen types. Analysis of 665 follow-up multi-varied specimens also showed combined swab as the last specimen among all specimen types to become negative, after an average 6.6 (range 4-10) days post-treatment, having lowest (15.48) and average (29.96) Ct values of ORF1b respectively indicating posterior nasopharyngeal tract as primary nCoV afflicted site with high viral load.ConclusionThe combined swab may be recommended as a more appropriate specimen for both diagnosis and monitoring of COVID-19 treatment by rRT-PCR for assessing virus clearance to help physicians in taking evidence-based decision before discharging patients. Implementing combined swabs globally will definitely help in management and control of the pandemic, as it is the need of the hour.
| S-EPMC8021168 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background: Due to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, demand for diagnostic testing has increased drastically, resulting in shortages of necessary materials to conduct the tests and overwhelming the capacity of testing laboratories. The supply scarcity and capacity limits affect test administration: priority must be given to hospitalized patients and symptomatic individuals, which can prevent the identification of asymptomatic and presymptomatic individuals and hence effective tracking and tracing policies. We describe optimized group testing strategies applicable to SARS-CoV-2 tests in scenarios tailored to the current COVID-19 pandemic and assess significant gains compared to individual testing. Methods: We account for biochemically realistic scenarios in the context of dilution effects on SARS-CoV-2 samples and consider evidence on specificity and sensitivity of PCR-based tests for the novel coronavirus. Because of the current uncertainty and the temporal and spatial changes in the prevalence regime, we provide analysis for several realistic scenarios and propose fast and reliable strategies for massive testing procedures. Key Findings: We find significant efficiency gaps between different group testing strategies in realistic scenarios for SARS-CoV-2 testing, highlighting the need for an informed decision of the pooling protocol depending on estimated prevalence, target specificity, and high- vs. low-risk population. For example, using one of the presented methods, all 1.47 million inhabitants of Munich, Germany, could be tested using only around 141 thousand tests if the infection rate is below 0.4% is assumed. Using 1 million tests, the 6.69 million inhabitants from the city of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, could be tested as long as the infection rate does not exceed 1%. Moreover, we provide an interactive web application, available at www.grouptexting.com, for visualizing the different strategies and designing pooling schemes according to specific prevalence scenarios and test configurations. Interpretation: Altogether, this work may help provide a basis for an efficient upscaling of current testing procedures, which takes the population heterogeneity into account and is fine-grained towards the desired study populations, e.g., mild/asymptomatic individuals vs. symptomatic ones but also mixtures thereof. Funding: German Science Foundation (DFG), German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF), Chan Zuckerberg Initiative DAF, and Austrian Science Fund (FWF).
| S-EPMC8416485 | biostudies-literature
Project description:In the ongoing global fight against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), the sample preparation process for real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR) faces challenges due to time-consuming steps, labor-intensive procedures, contamination risks, resource demands, and environmental implications. However, optimized strategies for sample preparation have been poorly investigated, and the combination of RNase inhibitors and Proteinase K has been rarely considered. Hence, we investigated combinations of several extraction-free protocols incorporating heat treatment, sample dilution, and Proteinase K and RNase inhibitors, and validated the effectiveness using 120 SARS-CoV-2 positive and 62 negative clinical samples. Combining sample dilution and heat treatment with Proteinase K and RNase inhibitors addition exhibited the highest sensitivity (84.26%) with a mean increase in cycle threshold (Ct) value of + 3.8. Meanwhile, combined sample dilution and heat treatment exhibited a sensitivity of 79.63%, accounting for a 38% increase compared to heat treatment alone. Our findings highlight that the incorporation of Proteinase K and RNase inhibitors with sample dilution and heat treatment contributed only marginally to the improvement without yielding statistically significant differences. Sample dilution significantly impacts SARS-CoV-2 detection, and sample conditions play a crucial role in the efficiency of extraction-free methods. Our findings may provide insights for streamlining diagnostic testing, enhancing its accessibility, cost-effectiveness, and sustainability.
| S-EPMC10663557 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionThe gold standard for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) detection is real-time reverse transcription PCR (rRT-PCR), which is expensive, has a long turnaround time and requires special equipment and trained personnel. Nasopharyngeal swabs are uncomfortable, not suitable for certain patient groups and do not allow self-testing. Convenient, well-tolerated rapid antigen tests (RATs) for SARS-CoV-2 detection are called for.Gap statementMore real-life performance data on anterior nasal RATs are required.AimWe set out to evaluate the anterior nasal AMP RAT in comparison with rRT-PCR in a hospital cohort.MethodologyThe study included 175 patients, either hospitalized in a coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) ward or screened in a preadmittance outpatient clinic. Two swabs were collected per patient: an anterior nasal one for the RAT and a combined naso-/oropharyngeal one for the rRT-PCR. Sixty-five patients (37%) were rRT-PCR-positive [cycle threshold (C t) <40].ResultsThe anterior nasal AMP RAT showed an overall sensitivity and specificity of 29.2 % (18.6-41.8, 95 % CI) and 100.0 % (96.7-100.0, 95 % CI) respectively. In patients with a C t value <25, <30 and <33, higher sensitivities were observed. Time since symptom onset was significantly higher in patients with a false-negative RAT (P=0.02).ConclusionThe anterior nasal AMP RAT showed low sensitivities in this cohort, especially in patients with a longer time since symptom onset. Further knowledge concerning the viral load and antigen expression over time and in different swabbing locations is needed to outline the usage time frame for SARS-CoV-2 RAT.
| S-EPMC9394671 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Sarcoidosis + Follow-up 6 month after Keywords = sarcoidosis Keywords = follow-up Keywords: other
2005-01-18 | GSE1907 | GEO
Project description:BackgroundPresented work studies the association of COVID-19 severity, patient demographics, and clinical history with cycle threshold (Ct) values of SARS CoV2-rRT-PCR. We studied the Ct values for Orf1ab, N, and RdRp genes in association with all the factors mentioned above.Methods and resultsWe examined the individuals (n = 6331) that consulted two private diagnostic centers for COVID-19 testing. SARS-CoV-2 was detected by RT-PCR assays using different commercial kits. Clinical and demographic information was collected by the attending health care professional. Ct values were not associated with the age, sex, or clinical history of the patient. Orf1ab and N genes Ct values were only weakly associated with symptoms at the time of the SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR test. Also, the distributions of Ct values in SARS-CoV-2 positive patients are very similar irrespective of symptomatology.ConclusionWe conclude that the Ct values may have limitations in reliably predicting COVID-19 severity and should be used or reported with caution.
| S-EPMC8943503 | biostudies-literature