Dataset Information

Diagnostic evaluation of qRT-PCR-based kit and dPCR-based kit for COVID-19.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19) is well known as a fatal disease, first discovered at Wuhan in China, ranging from mild to death, such as shortness of breath and fever. Early diagnosis of COVID-19 is a crucial point in preventing global prevalence.

Objective

We aimed to evaluate the diagnostic competency and efficiency with the Allplex™ 2019-nCoV Assay kit and the Dr. PCR 20 K COVID-19 Detection kit, designed based on the qRT-PCR and dPCR technologies, respectively.

Methods

A total of 30 negative and 20 COVID-19 positive specimens were assigned to the diagnostic test by using different COVID-19 diagnosis kits. Diagnostic accuracy was measured by statistical testing with sensitivity, specificity, and co-efficiency calculations.

Results

Comparing both diagnostic kits, we confirmed that the diagnostic results of 30 negative and 20 positive cases were the same pre-diagnostic results. The diagnostic statistics test results were perfectly matched with value (1). Cohen's Kappa coefficient was demonstrated that the given kits in two different ways were "almost perfect" with value (1). In evaluating the detection capability, the dilutional linearity experiments substantiate that the Dr. PCR 20 K COVID-19 Detection kit could detect SARS-CoV-2 viral load at a concentration ten times lower than that of the Allplex™ 2019-nCoV Assay kit.

Conclusions

In this study, we propose that the dPCR diagnosis using LOAA dPCR could be a powerful method for COVID-19 point-of-care tests requiring immediate diagnosis in a limited time and space through the advantages of relatively low sample concentration and small equipment size compared to conventional qRT-PCR.

SUBMITTER: Lee CJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8441239 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:To meet the unprecedented requirement of diagnostic testing for SARS-CoV-2, a large number of diagnostic kits were authorized by concerned authorities for diagnostic use within a short period of time during the initial phases of the ongoing pandemic. We undertook this study to evaluate the inter-test agreement and other key operational features of 5 such commercial kits that have been extensively used in India for routine diagnostic testing for COVID-19. The five commercial kits were evaluated, using a panel of positive and negative respiratory samples, considering the kit provided by National Institute of Virology, Indian Council of Medical Research (2019-nCoV Kit) as the reference. The positive panel comprised of individuals who fulfilled the 3 criteria of being clinically symptomatic, having history of contact with diagnosed cases and testing positive in the reference kit. The negative panel included both healthy and disease controls, the latter being drawn from individuals diagnosed with other respiratory viral infections. The same protocol of sample collection, same RNA extraction kit and same RT-PCR instrument were used for all the kits. Clinical samples were collected from a panel of 92 cases and 60 control patients, who fulfilled our inclusion criteria. The control group included equal number of healthy individuals and patients infected with other respiratory viruses (n = 30, in each group). We observed varying sensitivity and specificity among the evaluated kits, with LabGun COVID-19 RT-PCR kit showing the highest sensitivity and specificity (94% and 100% respectively), followed by TaqPath COVID-19 Combo and Allplex 2019-nCoV assays. The extent of inter-test agreement was not associated with viral loads of the samples. Poor correlation was observed between Ct values of the same genes amplified using different kits. Our findings reveal the presence of wide heterogeneity and sub-optimal inter-test agreement in the diagnostic performance of the evaluated kits and hint at the need of adopting stringent standards for fulfilling the quality assurance requirements of the COVID-19 diagnostic process.