Dataset Information

Impact of different SARS-CoV-2 assays on laboratory turnaround time.

ABSTRACT: Introduction. Clinical microbiology laboratories have had to cope with an increase in the volume of tests due to the emergence of the SARS-CoV-2 virus. Short turnaround times (TATs) are important for case tracing and to help clinicians in patient management. In such a context, high-throughput systems are essential to process the bulk of the tests. Rapid tests are also required to ensure shorter TATs for urgent situations. In our laboratory, SARS-CoV-2 assays were initially implemented on our custom platform using a previously published method. The commercial cobas 6800 (Roche diagnostics) assay and the GeneXpert Xpress (Cepheid) SARS-CoV-2 assay were implemented on 24 March and 8 April 2020, respectively, as soon as available.Hypothesis/Gap Statement. Despite the abundant literature on SARS-CoV-2 assays, the articles focus mainly on the diagnostic performances. This is to our knowledge the first article that specifically studies the TAT of different assays.Aim. We aimed to describe the impact of various SARS-CoV-2 assays on the TAT at the beginning of the outbreak.Methodology. In this study, we retrospectively analysed the TAT of all SARS-CoV-2 assays performed in our centre between 24 February and 9 June, 2020.Results. We retrieved 33 900 analyses, with a median TAT of 6.25 h. TATs were highest (6.9 h) when only our custom platform was used (24 February to 24 March, 2020). They were reduced to 6.1 h when the cobas system was introduced (24 March to 8 April, 2020). The implementation of the GeneXpert further reduced the median TAT to 4.8 h (8 April to 9 June, 2020). The GeneXpert system had the shortest median TAT (1.9 h), followed by the cobas (5.5 h) and by our custom platform (6.9 h).Conclusion. This work shows that the combination of high-throughput systems and rapid tests allows the efficient processing of a large number of tests with a short TAT. In addition, the use of a custom platform allowed the quick implementation of an in-house test when commercial assays were not yet available.

SUBMITTER: Marquis B

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8289200 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:The coronavirus infectious disease (COVID-19) is caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) viruses. The pandemic has emerged as a global public health crisis, and the threat of fast-spreading of the latest variants of the coronavirus (such as omicron, delta) is rampant. Therefore, a fast and reliable diagnostic assay is needed to make the clinical decision for further treatment. The study aims to develop a Centers for Disease and Prevention (CDC)-modified qualitative real-time reverse transcriptase PCR (RT-qPCR) assay and parallel assessment of commercially available RT-qPCR assay (Altona, Seegene, BD, and GBC) to detect SARS-CoV-2. Two hundred nine samples were chosen randomly out of around two hundred thousand samples. The panel consisted of SARS-CoV-2-positive (n = 156) and SARS-CoV-2-negative (n = 52) nasopharyngeal swab specimens for a primary clinical evaluation. Furthermore, 29 positive samples were sequenced using Oxford Nanopore Minion technology. Two hundred nine patient sample data of the cycle threshold (Ct) readings for target genes of five assays are 100% sensitive for Ct values. Mean Ct values for N1, N2, RdRp, S, and E of the positive controls in CDC assay, RealStar®, Allplex, GBC, and SD Biosensor were 17.5 ± 0.49, 16.9 ± 0.51, 20 ± 0.49, 21.7 ± 0.38, and 23.1 ± 0.43, respectively. F test value shows ≥ 1, which was statistically significant. All assays showed an efficiency of < 120% and R squares were < 0.99, which is well above the required threshold value. Thus, when taking the CDC-modified assay as a gold standard, the other four assays demonstrated a p value of 0.0000, concordance at 100%, and a Kappa at 1.000. A maximum-likelihood (ML) tree was constructed and compared based on full-length SARS-CoV-2 with Wuhan isolate. These isolates are closely related to the B.1.617 lineage and reference sequences. Therefore, we conclude that all RT-PCR kits assessed in this study shall be used for routine diagnostics of COVID-19 in patients.Supplementary informationThe online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00580-022-03356-y.

Project description:BackgroundReal-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) testing for the identification of viral nucleic acid is the current standard for the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection, but technical issues limit its utilization for large-scale screening. Serological immunoglobulin M (IgM)/IgG testing has been proposed as a useful tool for detecting SARS-CoV-2 exposure.ObjectiveThe objective of our study was to compare the results of the rapid serological VivaDiag test for SARS-CoV-2-related IgM/IgG detection with those of the standard RT-PCR laboratory test for identifying SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid.MethodsWe simultaneously performed both serological and molecular tests with a consecutive series of 191 symptomatic patients. The results provided by a new rapid serological colorimetric test for analyzing IgM/IgG expression were compared with those of RT-PCR testing for SARS-CoV-2 detection.ResultsOf the 191 subjects, 70 (36.6%) tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 based on RT-PCR results, while 34 (17.3%) tested positive based on serological IgM/IgG expression. Additionally, 13 (6.8%) subjects tested positive based on serological test results, but also tested negative based on RT-PCR results. The rapid serological test had a sensitivity of 30% and a specificity of 89% compared to the standard RT-PCR assay. Interestingly, the performance of both assays improved 8 days after symptom appearance. After 10 days had passed since symptom appearance, the predictive value of the rapid serological test was higher than that of the standard molecular assay (proportion of positive results: 40% vs 20%). Multivariate analysis showed that age >58 years (P<.01) and period of >15 days after symptom onset (P<.02) were significant and independent factors associated with serological test positivity.ConclusionsThe rapid serological test analyzed in this study seems limited in terms of usefulness when diagnosing SARS-CoV-2 infection. However, it may be useful for providing relevant information on people's immunoreaction to COVID-19 exposure.

Dataset Information

Impact of different SARS-CoV-2 assays on laboratory turnaround time.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets