Comparative Evaluation of the Thermo Fisher TaqPath COVID-19 Combo Kit with the Cepheid Xpert® Xpress SARS-CoV-2 Assay for Detecting SARS-CoV-2 in Nasopharyngeal Specimens
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
ORGANISM(S): Homo sapiens (human)
SUBMITTER: Teddie Proctor
PROVIDER: S-BSST645 | biostudies-other |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other
Similar Datasets
Project description:The Cepheid Xpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2/Flu/RSV combination test received emergency use authorization approval by the United States Food and Drug Administration in December 2020, and Health Canada approval in January 2021. The performance characteristics of the GeneXpert Xpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2/Flu/RSV combination test were assessed at Lakeridge Health Oshawa and the National Microbiology Laboratory of Canada. The combination test was compared to the Xpert SARS-CoV-2 and Xpert Flu/RSV assays, and the BioFire FilmArray Respiratory Panel 2.1 (RP2.1) test kit. Materials evaluated were serial dilutions of chemically-inactivated SARS-CoV-2 and remnant clinical specimens (nasal or nasopharyngeal swabs) collected from patients. The limit of detection (LOD) for the SARS-CoV-2 component of the Xpert SARS-CoV-2/Flu/RSV combination test was determined to be <100 viral copies/mL when using chemically-inactivated SARS-CoV-2. In total, 86 clinical positive and 51 clinical negative samples were used for this study, with mixtures of clinical positives being used to mimic coinfection and screen for competitive inhibition. The combination test showed a high percent agreement with the Xpert SARS-CoV-2 and Xpert Flu/RSV tests, as well as the BioFire FilmArray RP2.1. Based on the findings from this study and a growing body of research, the Xpert SARS-CoV-2/Flu/RSV combination test will serve as an effective replacement for the Xpert SARS-CoV-2 and Xpert Flu/RSV assays.
| S-EPMC8040320 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC7484747 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) pandemic, caused by SARS-CoV-2, has resulted in a global testing supply shortage. In response, pooled testing has emerged as a promising strategy that can immediately increase testing capacity. In pooled sample testing, multiple samples are combined (or pooled) together and tested as a single unit. If the pool is positive, the individual samples can then be individually tested to identify the positive case(s). Here, we provide support for the adoption of sample pooling with the point-of-care Cepheid Xpert® Xpress SARS-CoV-2 molecular assay. Corroborating previous findings, the limit of detection of this assay was comparable to laboratory-developed reverse-transcription quantitative PCR SARS-CoV-2 tests, with observed detection below 100 copies/mL. The Xpert® Xpress assay detected SARS-CoV-2 after samples with minimum viral loads of 461 copies/mL were pooled in groups of six. Based on these data, we recommend the adoption of pooled testing with the Xpert® Xpress SARS-CoV-2 assay where warranted based on public health needs. The suggested number of samples per pool, or the pooling depth, is unique for each point-of-care testing site and can be determined by the positive test rates. To statistically determine appropriate pooling depth, we have calculated the pooling efficiency for numerous combinations of pool sizes and test rates. This information is included as a supplemental dataset that we encourage public health authorities to use as a guide to make recommendations that will maximize testing capacity and resource conservation.
| S-EPMC7652318 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Public health experts emphasize the need for quick, point-of-care SARS-CoV-2 detection as an effective strategy for controlling virus spread. To this end, many "antigen" detection devices were developed and commercialized. These devices are mostly based on detecting SARS-CoV-2's nucleocapsid protein. Recently, alerts issued by both the FDA and the CDC raised concerns regarding the devices' tendency to exhibit false positive results. In this work, we developed a novel alternative spike-based antigen assay, comprising four high-affinity, specific monoclonal antibodies, directed against different epitopes on the spike's S1 subunit. The assay's performance was evaluated for COVID-19 detection from nasopharyngeal swabs, compared to an in-house nucleocapsid-based assay, composed of novel antibodies directed against the nucleocapsid. Detection of COVID-19 was carried out in a cohort of 284 qRT-PCR positive and negative nasopharyngeal swab samples. The time resolved fluorescence (TRF) ELISA spike assay displayed very high specificity (99%) accompanied with a somewhat lower sensitivity (66% for Ct < 25), compared to the nucleocapsid ELISA assay which was more sensitive (85% for Ct < 25) while less specific (87% specificity). Despite being outperformed by qRT-PCR, we suggest that there is room for such tests in the clinical setting, as cheap and rapid pre-screening tools. Our results further suggest that when applying antigen detection, one must consider its intended application (sensitivity vs specificity), taking into consideration that the nucleocapsid might not be the optimal target. In this regard, we propose that a combination of both antigens might contribute to the validity of the results. Schematic representation of sample collection and analysis. The figure was created using BioRender.com.
| S-EPMC7993413 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionStudies describing the performance characteristics of the cobas®6800 system for SARS-CoV-2 detection in deep respiratory specimens and freeze-thaw stability are limited. The current study compares the clinical performance of the automated SARS-CoV-2 assay on the cobas®6800 system to a lab-developed assay (LDA) and the cobas impact of freeze-thawing combined with lysis buffer.MethodsBoth retrospective and prospectively selected deep respiratory samples and oro- and nasopharyngeal samples in either E-swab® or GLY- were tested using the SARS-CoV-2 assay on the cobas®6800 System and compared to a lab developed assay. Additonally, SARS-CoV-2 RNA stability was assessed after one freeze-thaw cycle with or without lysis buffer.ResultsIn total, 221 (58.3 %) oro- and nasopharyngeal swabs, 131 (34.6 %) deep respiratory specimens, and n = 25 (6.6 %) swabs of unknown origin were included to study clinical performance. Only 4 samples gave discrepant results, all being positive in the LDA and not the cobas®6800 system. For stability testing, 66 samples without and 110 with lysis buffer were included. No clinically significant difference was found in test results after one freeze-thaw cycle and addition of lysis buffer.ConclusionBased on our findings, the cobas®6800 SARS-CoV-2 RNA assay yielded similar results as the LDA in oro-/nasopharyngeal swabs and deep respiratory specimens. Moreover, the cobas®6800 SARS-CoV-2 RNA assay yielded similar results before and after a freeze-thaw cycle, with better preservation of low viral loads in lysis buffer.
| S-EPMC7648882 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ACE2 on epithelial cells is the SARS-CoV-2 entry receptor. Single-cell RNA-sequencing data derived from two COVID-19 cohorts revealed that MAP4K3/GLK-positive epithelial cells were increased in patients. SARS-CoV-2-induced GLK overexpression in epithelial cells correlated with COVID-19 severity and vesicle secretion. GLK overexpression induced the epithelial cell-derived exosomes containing ACE2; the GLK-induced exosomes transported ACE2 proteins to recipient cells, facilitating pseudovirus infection. Consistently, ACE2 proteins were increased in the serum exosomes from another COVID-19 cohort. Remarkably, SARS-CoV-2 spike protein stimulated GLK, and GLK stabilized ACE2 in epithelial cells. Mechanistically, GLK phosphorylated ACE2 at two serine residues (Ser776, Ser783), leading to dissociation of ACE2 from its E3 ligase UBR4. Reduction of UBR4-induced Lys48-linked ubiquitination at three lysine residues (Lys26, Lys112, Lys114) of ACE2 prevented its degradation. Furthermore, SARS-CoV-2 pseudovirus or live virus infection in humanized ACE2 mice induced GLK and ACE2 protein levels, as well as ACE2-containing exosomes. Collectively, ACE2 stabilization by SARS-CoV-2-induced MAP4K3/GLK may contribute to the pathogenesis of COVID-19.
| S-SCDT-EMM-2022-15904 | biostudies-other
Project description:Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a newly emerging human infectious disease caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2, previously called 2019-nCoV). Based on the rapid increase in the rate of human infection, the World Health Organization (WHO) has classified the COVID-19 outbreak as a pandemic. Because no specific drugs or vaccines for COVID-19 are yet available, early diagnosis and management are crucial for containing the outbreak. Here, we report a field-effect transistor (FET)-based biosensing device for detecting SARS-CoV-2 in clinical samples. The sensor was produced by coating graphene sheets of the FET with a specific antibody against SARS-CoV-2 spike protein. The performance of the sensor was determined using antigen protein, cultured virus, and nasopharyngeal swab specimens from COVID-19 patients. Our FET device could detect the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein at concentrations of 1 fg/mL in phosphate-buffered saline and 100 fg/mL clinical transport medium. In addition, the FET sensor successfully detected SARS-CoV-2 in culture medium (limit of detection [LOD]: 1.6 × 101 pfu/mL) and clinical samples (LOD: 2.42 × 102 copies/mL). Thus, we have successfully fabricated a promising FET biosensor for SARS-CoV-2; our device is a highly sensitive immunological diagnostic method for COVID-19 that requires no sample pretreatment or labeling.
| S-EPMC7172500 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Detection of Bordetella pertussis and Bordetella parapertussis using molecular methods is sensitive and specific with a short turnaround time compared to other diagnostic methods. In this multicenter study, we compared the performance of the Simplexa Bordetella Direct kit to those of other molecular assays in detecting and differentiating B. pertussis and B. parapertussis in nasopharyngeal swab specimens. The limits of detection (LODs) were 150 CFU/ml or 3 fg/μl of DNA for B. pertussis and 1,500 CFU/ml or 10 fg/μl of DNA for B. parapertussis A total of 1,103 fresh and residual frozen specimens from eight clinical sites were tested. Combining the data from individual clinical sites using different comparative assays, the overall positive percent agreement (PPA) and negative percent agreement (NPA) for B. pertussis were 98.7% and 97.3%, respectively. The overall PPA and NPA for B. parapertussis were 96.7% and 100%, respectively. For prospective fresh specimens, the overall PPA and NPA for both targets were 97.7% and 99.3%, respectively. For retrospective frozen specimens, the overall PPA and NPA for both targets were 92.6% and 93.2%, respectively. The percentage of invalid results was 1.0%. A cross-reactivity study using 74 non-Bordetella bacterial species and five yeast species revealed that the Simplexa Bordetella Direct kit was 100% specific. The hands-on time and assay run time of the Simplexa Bordetella Direct kit are favorable compared to those of other commercial and laboratory-developed tests. In summary, the Simplexa Bordetella Direct kit has a performance comparable to those of other molecular assays for the detection of B. pertussis and B. parapertussis.
| S-EPMC7771431 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-BSST1037 | biostudies-other
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC8444446 | biostudies-literature