Dataset Information

False-negative real-time polymerase chain reaction tests in COVID-19 patients: an epidemiological analysis of 302 patients

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

Patients who arrive at the emergency department (ED) with COVID-19, who test negative at the first real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), represent a clinical challenge. This study aimed to evaluate if the clinical manifestation at presentation, the laboratory and imaging results, and the prognosis of COVID-19 differ in patients who tested negative at the first RT-PCR compared with those who tested positive and also to evaluate if comorbid conditions patient-related or the period of arrival are associated with negative testing.

Study design

We retrospectively collected clinical data of patients who accessed the ED from March 1 to May 15, 2020.

Methods

We compared clinical variables, comorbid conditions, and clinical outcomes in the two groups by univariate analysis and logistic regression.

Results

Patients who tested negative at the first RT-PCR showed a higher prevalence of cardiopathy, immunosuppression, and diabetes, as well as a higher leukocyte and lower lymphocyte counts compared with patients who tested positive. A bilateral interstitial syndrome and a typical pattern at computed tomography scan were prevalent in the test-negative group. Test-negative patients were more likely to be admitted to the hospital but less likely to need admission in a high level of care ward. The false-negative rate increased from March to May.

Conclusion

False-negative RT-PCR COVID-19 patients present a similar spectrum of symptoms compared with positive cohort, but more comorbidities. Imaging helps to identify them. True positives had a higher risk of serious complications.

SUBMITTER: Caramello V

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8455250 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Tests for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) based on reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) are being used to rule out infection among high-risk persons, such as exposed inpatients and health care workers. It is critical to understand how the predictive value of the test varies with time from exposure and symptom onset to avoid being falsely reassured by negative test results. OBJECTIVE:To estimate the false-negative rate by day since infection. DESIGN:Literature review and pooled analysis. SETTING:7 previously published studies providing data on RT-PCR performance by time since symptom onset or SARS-CoV-2 exposure using samples from the upper respiratory tract (n = 1330). PATIENTS:A mix of inpatients and outpatients with SARS-CoV-2 infection. MEASUREMENTS:A Bayesian hierarchical model was fitted to estimate the false-negative rate by day since exposure and symptom onset. RESULTS:Over the 4 days of infection before the typical time of symptom onset (day 5), the probability of a false-negative result in an infected person decreases from 100% (95% CI, 100% to 100%) on day 1 to 67% (CI, 27% to 94%) on day 4. On the day of symptom onset, the median false-negative rate was 38% (CI, 18% to 65%). This decreased to 20% (CI, 12% to 30%) on day 8 (3 days after symptom onset) then began to increase again, from 21% (CI, 13% to 31%) on day 9 to 66% (CI, 54% to 77%) on day 21. LIMITATION:Imprecise estimates due to heterogeneity in the design of studies on which results were based. CONCLUSION:Care must be taken in interpreting RT-PCR tests for SARS-CoV-2 infection-particularly early in the course of infection-when using these results as a basis for removing precautions intended to prevent onward transmission. If clinical suspicion is high, infection should not be ruled out on the basis of RT-PCR alone, and the clinical and epidemiologic situation should be carefully considered. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE:National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, Johns Hopkins Health System, and U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Project description:Background and aimDifferent polymerase chain reaction (PCR) techniques have and are still being used for the direct detection of Brucella DNA in serum samples of different animal species and humans without being validated or properly validated, resulting in discrepancies. Thus, this study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic performance of the TaqMan Real-Time-PCR (RT-PCR) targeting the bcsp31 gene versus conventional PCR for the accurate diagnosis of brucellosis at the genus level in cattle sera.Materials and methodsOne hundred and eighty-four serum samples were collected from bacteriologically positive and negative cows with ages ranging from 1 to 5 years old at some infected private farms in the Nile Delta under quarantine measures as well as brucellosis free farms. These samples were classified into four groups after serological diagnosis and investigated by TaqMan RT-PCR and conventional PCR targeting the IS711 gene for Brucella DNA detection. The diagnostic performance characteristics of both PCR techniques were estimated considering the bacteriological results as a gold standard.ResultsTaqMan RT-PCR revealed superiority over conventional PCR; it was able to detect Brucella DNA in 95% (67/70) and 89% (25/28) of the cattle sera samples belonging to Group 1 (serologically and bacteriologically positive) and Group 2 (serologically negative but bacteriologically positive), respectively. On evaluating the diagnostic performance, TaqMan RT-PCR showed superior diagnostic sensitivity (93.9%), diagnostic specificity (88.4%), performance index (182.3), almost perfect kappa agreement (0.825±0.042), strong positive correlation (r=0.826), high accuracy based on the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve, and area under the ROC curve (0.911) at p<0.05 and CI of 95%.ConclusionA cattle serum sample is not the metric of choice for targeting Brucella genomic DNA by conventional PCR. The time-saving and rapid TaqMan RT-PCR method revealed a better diagnostic performance in the detection of Brucella DNA in cattle sera. Such performance offered by TaqMan RT-PCR may be considered a step toward the possibility of using such technology in the direct differentiation between Brucella-infected and -vaccinated cattle immunized by smooth vaccines from cattle sera using primers specific for such vaccines.

Project description:The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), calls for prompt and accurate diagnosis and rapid turnaround time for test results to limit transmission. Here, we evaluated two independent molecular assays, the Biomeme SARS-CoV-2 test, and the Precision Biomonitoring TripleLock SARS-CoV-2 test on a field-deployable point-of-care real-time PCR instrument, Franklin three9, in combination with Biomeme M1 Sample Prep Cartridge Kit for RNA 2.0 (M1) manual extraction system for rapid, specific, and sensitive detection of SARS-COV-2 in cell culture, human, and animal clinical samples. The Biomeme SARS-CoV-2 assay, which simultaneously detects two viral targets, the orf1ab and S genes, and the Precision Biomonitoring TripleLock SARS-CoV-2 assay that targets the 5' untranslated region (5' UTR) and the envelope (E) gene of SARS-CoV-2 were highly sensitive and detected as low as 15 SARS-CoV-2 genome copies per reaction. In addition, the two assays were specific and showed no cross-reactivity with Middle Eastern respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV), infectious bronchitis virus (IBV), porcine epidemic diarrhea virus (PEDV), transmissible gastroenteritis (TGE) virus, and other common human respiratory viruses and bacterial pathogens. Also, both assays were highly reproducible across different operators and instruments. When used to test animal samples, both assays equally detected SARS-CoV-2 genetic materials in the swabs from SARS-CoV-2-infected hamsters. The M1 lysis buffer completely inactivated SARS-CoV-2 within 10 min at room temperature enabling safe handling of clinical samples. Collectively, these results show that the Biomeme and Precision Biomonitoring TripleLock SARS-CoV-2 mobile testing platforms could reliably and promptly detect SARS-CoV-2 in both human and animal clinical samples in approximately an hour and can be used in remote areas or health care settings not traditionally serviced by a microbiology laboratory.