Suboptimal Biological Sampling as a Probable Cause of False-Negative COVID-19 Diagnostic Test Results

Metabolomics in the Diagnosis of Bacterial Infections

One of the essential factors in the appropriate treatment of infections is accurate and timely laboratory diagnosis. The correct diagnosis of infections plays a vital role in determining desirable therapy and controlling the spread of pathogens. Traditional methods of infection diagnosis are limited by several factors such as insufficient sensitivity and specificity, being time-consuming and laborious, having a low ability to distinguish infection from non-infectious inflammatory conditions and a low potential to predict treatment outcomes. Therefore, it is necessary to find innovative strategies for detecting specific biomarkers in order to diagnose infections. The rapid advancement of metabolomics makes it possible to determine the pattern of metabolite changes in the both of pathogen and the host during an infection. Metabolomics is a method used to assess the levels and type of metabolites in an organism. Metabolites are of low-molecular-weight compounds produced as a result of metabolic processes and pathways within cells. Metabolomics provides valuable data to detect accurate biomarkers of specific biochemical features directly related to certain phenotypes or conditions. This study aimed to review the applications and progress of metabolomics as a biomarker for the diagnosis of bacterial infections.

Saliva Diagnostics in Spaceflight Virology Studies-A Review

Many biological markers of normal and disease states can be detected in saliva. The benefits of saliva collection for research include being non-invasive, ease of frequent sample collection, saving time, and being cost-effective. A small volume (≈1 mL) of saliva is enough for these analyses that can be collected in just a few minutes. For "dry" saliva paper matrices, additional drying times (about 30 min) may be needed, but this can be performed at room temperature without the need for freezers and specialized equipment. Together, these make saliva an ideal choice of body fluid for many clinical studies from diagnosis to monitoring measurable biological substances in hospital settings, remote, and other general locations including disaster areas. For these reasons, we have been using saliva (dry as well as wet) from astronauts participating in short- and long-duration space missions for over two decades to conduct viral, stress, and immunological studies. We have also extended the use of saliva to space analogs including bed rest, Antarctica, and closed-chamber studies. Saliva is a biomarker-rich and easily accessible body fluid that could enable larger and faster public health screenings, earlier disease detection, and improved patient outcomes. This review summarizes our lessons learned from utilizing saliva in spaceflight research and highlights the advantages and disadvantages of saliva in clinical diagnostics.

Strategies to Overcome Erroneous Outcomes in Reverse Transcription-Polymerase Chain Reaction (RT-PCR) Testing: Insights From the COVID-19 Pandemic

The reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) test to detect SARS-CoV-2, the virus causing COVID-19, has been regarded as the diagnostic gold standard. However, the excessive sensitivity of RT-PCR may cause false-positive outcomes from contamination. Again, its technical complexity increases the chances of false-negatives due to pre-analytical and analytical errors. This narrative review explores the elements contributing to inaccurate results during the COVID-19 pandemic and offers strategies to minimize these errors. False-positive results may occur due to specimen contamination, non-specific primer binding, residual viral RNA, and false-negatives, which may arise from improper sampling, timing, labeling, storage, low viral loads, mutations, and faulty test kits. Proposed mitigation strategies to enhance the accuracy of RT-PCR testing include comprehensive staff training in specimen collection, optimizing the timing of tests, analyzing multiple gene targets, incorporating clinical findings, workflow automation, and implementing stringent contamination control measures. Identifying and rectifying sources of error in RT-PCR diagnosis through quality control and standardized protocols is imperative for ensuring quality patient care and effective epidemic control.

Development and application of a novel recombinase polymerase amplification-Pyrococcus furiosus argonaute system for rapid detection of goose parvovirus

Rapid and accurate detection of goose parvovirus (GPV) is crucial for controlling outbreaks and mitigating their economic impact on the poultry industry. This study introduces recombinase polymerase amplification combined with the Pyrococcus furiosus argonaute (RPA-PfAgo) system, a novel diagnostic platform designed to address the limitations of traditional GPV detection methods. Capitalizing on the rapid DNA amplification of RPA and stringent nucleic acid cleavage by the PfAgo protein, the RPA-PfAgo system offers high specificity and sensitivity in detecting GPV. Our optimization efforts included primer and probe configurations, reaction parameters, and guided DNA selection, culminating in a detection threshold of 102 GPV DNA copies per microlitre. The specificity of the proposed method was rigorously validated against a spectrum of avian pathogens. Clinical application to lung tissues from GPV-infected geese yielded a detection concordance of 100%, surpassing that of qPCR and PCR in both rapidity and operational simplicity. The RPA-PfAgo system has emerged as a revolutionary diagnostic modality for managing this disease, as it is a promising rapid, economical, and onsite GPV detection method amenable to integration into broad-scale disease surveillance frameworks. Future explorations will extend the applicability of this method to diverse avian diseases and assess its field utility across various epidemiological landscapes.

A comprehensive meta-analysis and systematic review of breath analysis in detection of COVID-19 through Volatile organic compounds

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic had profound global impacts on daily lives, economic stability, and healthcare systems. Diagnosis of COVID-19 infection via RT-PCR was crucial in reducing spread of disease and informing treatment management. While RT-PCR is a key diagnostic test, there is room for improvement in the development of diagnostic criteria. Identification of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in exhaled breath provides a fast, reliable, and economically favorable alternative for disease detection.

METHODS

This meta-analysis analyzed the diagnostic performance of VOC-based breath analysis in detection of COVID-19 infection. A systematic review of twenty-nine papers using the grading criteria from Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) and PRISMA guidelines was conducted.

RESULTS

The cumulative results showed a sensitivity of 0.92 (95 % CI, 90 %-95 %) and a specificity of 0.90 (95 % CI 87 %-93 %). Subgroup analysis by variant demonstrated strong sensitivity to the original strain compared to the Omicron and Delta variant in detection of SARS-CoV-2 infection. An additional subgroup analysis of detection methods showed eNose technology had the highest sensitivity when compared to GC-MS, GC-IMS, and high sensitivity-MS.

CONCLUSION

Overall, these results support the use of breath analysis as a new detection method of COVID-19 infection.

Advances and Challenges in SARS-CoV-2 Detection: A Review of Molecular and Serological Technologies

The urgent need for accurate COVID-19 diagnostics has led to the development of various SARS-CoV-2 detection technologies. Real-time reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR) remains a reliable viral gene detection technique, while other molecular methods, including nucleic acid amplification techniques (NAATs) and isothermal amplification techniques, provide diverse and effective approaches. Serological assays, detecting antibodies in response to viral infection, are crucial for disease surveillance. Saliva-based immunoassays show promise for surveillance purposes. The efficiency of SARS-CoV-2 antibody detection varies, with IgM indicating recent exposure and IgG offering prolonged detectability. Various rapid tests, including lateral-flow immunoassays, present opportunities for quick diagnosis, but their clinical significance requires validation through further studies. Challenges include variations in specificity and sensitivity among testing platforms and evolving assay sensitivities over time. SARS-CoV-2 antigens, particularly the N and S proteins, play a crucial role in diagnostic methods. Innovative approaches, such as nanozyme-based assays and specific nucleotide aptamers, offer enhanced sensitivity and flexibility. In conclusion, ongoing advancements in SARS-CoV-2 detection methods contribute to the global effort in combating the COVID-19 pandemic.

Prospective, clinical comparison of self-collected throat-bilateral nares swabs and saline gargle compared to health care provider collected nasopharyngeal swabs among symptomatic outpatients with potential SARS-CoV-2 infection

Background

In British Columbia (BC), self-collected saline gargle (SG) is the only alternative to health care provider (HCP)-collected nasopharyngeal (NP) swabs to detect SARS-CoV-2 in an outpatient setting by polymerase chain reaction (PCR). However, some individuals cannot perform a SG. Our study aimed to assess combined throat-bilateral nares (TN) swabbing as a swab-based alternative.

Methods

Symptomatic individuals greater than 12 years of age seeking a COVID-19 PCR test at one of two COVID-19 collection centres in Metro Vancouver were asked to participate in this study. Participants provided a HCP-collected NP sample and a self-collected SG and TN sample for PCR testing, which were either HCP observed or unobserved.

Results

Three-hundred and eleven individuals underwent all three collections. Compared against HCP-NP, SG was 99% sensitive and 98% specific (kappa 0.97) and TN was 99% sensitive and 99% specific (kappa 0.98). Using the final clinical test interpretation as the reference standard, NP was 98% sensitive and 100% specific (kappa 0.98), and both SG and TN were 99% sensitive and 100% specific (both kappa 0.99). Mean cycle threshold values for each viral target were higher in SG specimens compared to the other sample types; however, this did not significantly impact the clinical performance, because the positivity rates were similar. The clinical performance of all specimen types was comparable within the first 7 days of symptom onset, regardless of the observation method. SG self-collections were rated the most acceptable, followed by TN.

Conclusions

TN provides another less invasive self-collection modality for symptomatic outpatient SARS-CoV-2 PCR testing.

Improving wound swab collection in paediatric patients: a quality improvement project

Microbiology sample swabs may be unsuccessful or rejected for a variety of reasons. Typically, errors occur in the preanalytical phase of sample collection. Errors with collection, handling and transport can lead to the need to repeat specimen collection. Unsuccessful specimens contribute to delays in diagnosis, increased patient stress and increased healthcare costs. An audit of sample swabs from London Health Sciences Centre Children's Hospital from August through October 2021 yielded complete success rates of 100% for ear and eye culture swabs, 98.1% for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus swabs and 88.9% for wound swabs. This project aimed to improve wound swab success to 95% on the paediatric inpatient and paediatric emergency departments by May 2022.Stakeholders from paediatric clinical services including physicians, nurses and the laboratory medicine team at our centre were engaged to guide quality improvement interventions to improve specimen success rate. Based on feedback, we implemented visual aids to our electronic laboratory test information guide. Additionally, visual reminders of correct sample collection equipment were placed in high traffic areas for nursing staff.After the interventions were implemented, a three-month follow-up showed that wound swab success rate rose to 95.3%. This study achieved its aim of improving wound swab success rate to 95%. It adds to the growing pool of evidence that preanalytical phase intervention such as visual aids can increase swab success rates, in healthcare settings.

Aptamer-Based Strategies to Address Challenges in COVID-19 Diagnosis and Treatments

Coronavirus disease (COVID-19), a highly contagious and rapidly spreading disease with significant fatality in the elderly population, has swept across the world since 2019. Since its first appearance, the causative agent, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), has undergone multiple mutations, with Omicron as the predominant circulating variant of concern at the moment. The gold standard for diagnosis of COVID-19 by real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) to detect the virus is laborious and requires well-trained personnel to perform sophisticated procedures. Also, the genetic variants of SARS-CoV-2 that arise regularly could result in false-negative detection. Meanwhile, the current COVID-19 treatments such as conventional medicine, complementary and alternative medicine, passive antibody therapy, and respiratory therapy are associated with adverse effects. Thus, there is an urgent need to discover novel diagnostic and therapeutic approaches against SARS-CoV-2 and its variants. Over the past 30 years, nucleic acid-based aptamers have gained increasing attention and serve as a promising alternative to the antibodies in the diagnostic and therapeutic fields with their uniqueness of being small, nonimmunogenicity, and thermally stable. Aptamer targeting the SARS-CoV-2 structural proteins or the host receptor proteins represent a powerful tool to control COVID-19 infection. In this review, challenges faced by currently available diagnostic and therapeutic tools for COVID-19 are underscored, along with how aptamers can shed a light on the current COVID-19 pandemic, focusing on the critical factors affecting the discovery of high-affinity aptamers and their potential applications to control COVID-19 infection.

Comparison of Three Lateral Flow Immunoassay Formats for the Detection of Antibodies against the SARS-CoV-2 Antigen

Reliable detection of specific antibodies against pathogens by lateral flow immunoassay (LFIA) greatly depends on the composition of the detectable complex and the order of its assembly. We compared three LFIA formats for revealing anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in sera with the following detected complexes in the analytical zone of the strip: antigen-antibodies-labeled immunoglobulin-binding protein (Scheme A); antigen-antibodies-labeled antigen (Scheme B); and immunoglobulin-binding protein-antibodies-labeled antigen (Scheme C). The lowest detection limit was observed for Scheme C, and was equal to 10 ng/mL of specific humanized monoclonal antibodies. When working with pooled positive sera, Scheme C had a detection limit 15 times lower than Scheme B and 255 times lower than Scheme A. Due to the high sensitivity of Scheme C, its application for the panel of human sera (n = 22) demonstrated 100% diagnostic specificity and sensitivity. These consistent results be useful for designing the format of LFIA serodiagnosis for other diseases.

Sensibility and Specificity of the VitaPCR™ SARS-CoV-2 Assay for the Rapid Diagnosis of COVID-19 in Older Adults in the Emergency Department

(1) Background: During the COVID-19 pandemic, rapid and reliable diagnostic tools are needed for detecting SARS-CoV-2 infection in urgent cases at admission to the hospital. We aimed to assess the performances of the rapid molecular VitaPCR™ test (Menarini Diagnostics) in a sample of older adults admitted to the Emergency Department of two Italian hospitals (2) Methods: The comparison between the rapid VitaPCR™ and the RT-PCR was performed in 1695 samples. Two naso-pharyngeal swab samplings from each individual were obtained and processed using the VitaPCR™ and the RT-PCR for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 (3) Results: VitaPCR™ exhibited good precision (<3% CV) and an almost perfect overall agreement (Cohen’s K = 0.90) with the RT-PCR. The limit of detection of the VitaPCR™ was 4.1 copies/µL. Compared to the RT-PCR, the sensitivity, the specificity, and the positive and negative predictive values of VitaPCR™ were 83.4%, 99.9%, 99.2% and 98.3%, respectively (4) Conclusions: The VitaPCR™ showed similar sensitivity and specificity to other molecular-based rapid tests. This study suggests that the VitaPCR™ can allow the rapid management of patients within the Emergency Department. Nevertheless, it is advisable to obtain a negative result by a RT-PCR assay before admitting a patient to a regular ward.

Correlations between Cytokine Levels, Liver Function Markers, and Neuropilin-1 Expression in Patients with COVID-19

Aim: The study evaluated the correlations between cytokine levels, liver function markers, and neuropilin-1 (NRP-1) expression in patients with COVID-19 in Egypt. The study also aimed to evaluate the accuracy sensitivity, specificity, and area under the curve (AUC) of the tested laboratory parameters in identifying COVID-19 infection and its severity. Patients and Methods: Fifty healthy subjects and 100 confirmed patients with COVID-19 were included in this study. COVID-19 patients were separated into two groups based on the severity of their symptoms. Serum ALT, AST, albumin, C-reactive protein (CRP), interleukin (IL)-1β, IL-4, IL-6, IL-18, IL-35, prostaglandin E2 (PGE2), and thromboxane A2 (TXA2) were estimated. We measured the gene expression for nuclear factor-kappa B p50 (NF-κB p50) and nuclear factor-kappa B p65 (NF-κB p65) and NRP-1 in blood samples using quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction (qRT-PCR). AUC and sensitivity and specificity for cytokine levels and NF-κB p50 and NF-κB p65 and NRP-1 in identifying COVID-19 infection were also determined in both moderate and severe patient groups using receiver-operating characteristic curve (ROC) analysis. Results: All patients with COVID-19 showed higher serum activities of liver enzymes, levels of CRP, IL-1β, IL-4, IL-6, IL-18, IL-35 PGE2, and TXA2, and mRNA expression of NF-κB p50, NF-κB p65, and NRP-1 than healthy subjects. The severe group exhibited a significant increase in serum ALT, AST and IL-6 and a significant decrease in albumin, IL-1β, TXA2, and NF-κB p65 levels compared to the moderate group. In all patients (moderate and severe), all cytokines were positively correlated with NF-κB p50, NF-κB p65 and NRP-1 expression levels. Serum ALT and AST were positively correlated with CRP, cytokines (IL-4, IL-6, IL-18, IL-35 and TXA2), and NF-κB p50 and NF-κB p65 expression levels in both moderate and severe groups. They were also positively correlated with serum IL-1β level in the severe COVID-19 patient group and with NRP-1 expression in the moderate group. Using the logistic regression analysis, the most important four statistically significant predictors associated with COVID-19 infection in the study were found to be IL-6, TAX2, NF-κB p50 and NF-κB p65. ROC analysis of these variables revealed that three of them had AUC > 0.8. In moderate cases, AUC of the serum TXA2 level and NF-κB p65 expression were 0.843 (95% CI 0.517−0.742, p < 0.001) and 0.806 (95% CI 0.739−0.874, p < 0.001), respectively. In the severe group, AUC of serum IL-6 level was 0.844 (95% CI 0.783−0.904, p < 0.001). Moreover, Il-6 had a sensitivity of 100% in both moderate and severe groups. Conclusions: This study concluded that liver injury in patients with COVID-19 may be strongly attributed to the cytokines storm, especially IL-6, which was positively correlated to NF-κB p50, NF-κB p65 and NRP-1 mRNA expression levels. Moreover, ROC analysis revealed that IL-6, TXA2, and NF-κB p65 could be useful in predicting the possibility of infection with COVID-19, and IL-6 could be of possible significance as a good predictor of the severity and disease progress. However, RT-qPCR for SARS-CoV-2 detection is essential to confirm infection and further clinical studies are required to confirm this elucidation.

Digital PCR Applications in the SARS-CoV-2/COVID-19 Era: a Roadmap for Future Outbreaks

The ongoing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), has led to a global public health disaster. The current gold standard for the diagnosis of infected patients is real-time reverse transcription-quantitative PCR (RT-qPCR). As effective as this method may be, it is subject to false-negative and -positive results, affecting its precision, especially for the detection of low viral loads in samples. In contrast, digital PCR (dPCR), the third generation of PCR, has been shown to be more effective than the gold standard, RT-qPCR, in detecting low viral loads in samples. In this review article, we selected publications to show the broad-spectrum applications of dPCR, including the development of assays and reference standards, environmental monitoring, mutation detection, and clinical diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2, while comparing it analytically to the gold standard, RT-qPCR. In summary, it is evident that the specificity, sensitivity, reproducibility, and detection limits of RT-dPCR are generally unaffected by common factors that may affect RT-qPCR. As this is the first time that dPCR is being tested in an outbreak of such a magnitude, knowledge of its applications will help chart a course for future diagnosis and monitoring of infectious disease outbreaks.

Development and Analytical Validation of a One-Step Five-Plex RT-ddPCR Assay for the Quantification of SARS-CoV-2 Transcripts in Clinical Samples

Highly sensitive methodologies for SARS-CoV-2 detection are essential for the control of COVID-19 pandemic. We developed and analytically validated a highly sensitive and specific five-plex one-step RT-ddPCR assay for SARS-CoV-2. We first designed in-silico novel primers and probes for the simultaneous absolute quantification of three different regions of the nucleoprotein (N) gene of SARS-CoV-2 (N1, N2, N3), a synthetic RNA as an external control (RNA-EC), and Beta-2-Microglobulin (B2M) as an endogenous RNA internal control (RNA-IC). The developed assay was analytically validated using synthetic DNA and RNA calibrator standards and then was applied to 100 clinical specimens previously analyzed with a commercially available CE-IVD RT-qPCR assay. The analytical validation of the developed assay resulted in very good performance characteristics in terms of analytical sensitivity, linearity, analytical specificity, and reproducibility and recovery rates even at very low viral concentrations. The simultaneous absolute quantification of the RNA-EC and RNA-IC provides the necessary metrics for quality control assessment. Direct comparison of the developed one-step five-plex RT-ddPCR assay with a CE-IVD RT-qPCR kit revealed a very high concordance and a higher sensitivity [concordance: 99/100 (99.0%, Spearman's correlation coefficient: -0.850, p < 0.001)]. The developed assay is highly sensitive, specific, and reproducible and has a broad linear dynamic range, providing absolute quantification of SARS-COV-2 transcripts. The inclusion of two RNA quality controls, an external and an internal, is highly important for standardization of SARS-COV-2 molecular testing in clinical and wastewater samples.

Simultaneous monitoring of eight human respiratory viruses including SARS-CoV-2 using liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry

Diagnosis of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection has primarily been achieved using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) for acute infection, and serology for prior infection. Assay with RT-PCR provides data on presence or absence of viral RNA, with no information on virus replication competence, infectivity, or virus characterisation. Liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC–MS/MS) is typically not used in clinical virology, despite its potential to provide supplemental data about the presence of viral proteins and thus the potential for replication-competent, transmissible virus. Using the SARS-CoV-2 as a model virus, we developed a fast ‘bottom-up’ proteomics workflow for discovery of target virus peptides using ‘serum-free’ culture conditions, providing high coverage of viral proteins without the need for protein or peptide fractionation techniques. This workflow was then applied to Coronaviruses OC43 and 229E, Influenza A/H1N1 and H3N2, Influenza B, and Respiratory Syncytial Viruses A and B. Finally, we created an LC–MS/MS method for targeted detection of the eight-virus panel in clinical specimens, successfully detecting peptides from the SARS-CoV-2 ORF9B and nucleoprotein in RT-PCR positive samples. The method provides specific detection of respiratory viruses from clinical samples containing moderate viral loads and is an important further step to the use of LC–MS/MS in diagnosis of viral infection.

Review of COVID-19 testing and diagnostic methods

More than six billion tests for COVID-19 has been already performed in the world. The testing for SARS-CoV-2 (Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus-2) virus and corresponding human antibodies is essential not only for diagnostics and treatment of the infection by medical institutions, but also as a pre-requisite for major semi-normal economic and social activities such as international flights, off line work and study in offices, access to malls, sport and social events. Accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, time to results and cost per test are essential parameters of those tests and even minimal improvement in any of them may have noticeable impact on life in the many countries of the world. We described, analyzed and compared methods of COVID-19 detection, while representing their parameters in 22 tables. Also, we compared test performance of some FDA approved test kits with clinical performance of some non-FDA approved methods just described in scientific literature. RT-PCR still remains a golden standard in detection of the virus, but a pressing need for alternative less expensive, more rapid, point of care methods is evident. Those methods that may eventually get developed to satisfy this need are explained, discussed, quantitatively compared. The review has a bioanalytical chemistry prospective, but it may be interesting for a broader circle of readers who are interested in understanding and improvement of COVID-19 testing, helping eventually to leave COVID-19 pandemic in the past.

Factors associated with weak positive SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis by reverse transcriptase-quantitative polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR)

During the COVID-19 pandemic, the reverse transcriptase-quantitative polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR) assay has been the primary method of diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection. However, RT-qPCR assay interpretation can be ambiguous with no universal absolute cut-off value to determine sample positivity, which particularly complicates the analysis of samples with high Ct values, or weak positives. Therefore, we sought to analyse factors associated with weak positive SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis.

We analysed sample data associated with all positive SARS-CoV-2 RT-qPCR diagnostic tests performed by the Victorian Infectious Diseases Reference Laboratory (VIDRL) in Melbourne, Australia, during the Victorian first wave (22 January 2020–30 May 2020). A subset of samples was screened for the presence of host DNA and RNA using qPCR assays for CCR5 and 18S, respectively.

Assays targeting the viral RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp) had higher Ct values than assays targeting the viral N and E genes. Weak positives were not associated with the age or sex of individuals’ samples nor with reduced levels of host DNA and RNA. We observed a relationship between Ct value and time post-SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis.

High Ct value or weak positive SARS-CoV-2 was not associated with any particular bias including poor biological sampling.

Comparison of SARS-CoV-2 molecular detection in nasopharyngeal swab, saliva, and gargle samples

The nasopharyngeal swab is a gold standard for detecting SARS-CoV-2. However, the inconvenience of this method compelled us to compare its efficiency with saliva and gargle samples, which we collected sequentially from 229 individuals. Saliva outperformed gargle samples, constituting a reliable RNA viral source with similar performance to nasopharyngeal samples.

Clinical Evaluation of Nasopharyngeal, Oropharyngeal, Nasal Swabs, and Saliva for the Detection of SARS-CoV-2 by Direct RT-PCR

Nasopharyngeal swab (NPS) and oropharyngeal swab (OPS) are the most widely used upper respiratory tract specimens for diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 using RT-qPCR. In contrast, nasal swab (NS) and saliva (SS), recently recommended by the WHO, are rarely used, and their test accuracy is limited. The method for direct RT-PCR detection of SARS-CoV-2 does not require an RNA extraction and is faster and easier than standard RT-PCR tests with RNA extraction. This study aimed to compare the diagnostic performance of upper respiratory tract samples for SARS-CoV-2 detection using the direct RT-PCR without preliminary heat inactivation. Here we report the application and validation of direct RT-PCR SARS-CoV-2 RNA on 165 clinical specimens of NPS/OP, and 36 samples of NS/NPS and 37 saliva samples (for the latter with prior deproteinization). The overall sensitivity estimates were 95.9%, 94.2%, 88.9%, and 94.6% for NPS/OPS/NS/SS samples, respectively, and the specificity was 100% against standard RT-PCR with RNA extraction. Overall, NS and SS testing by direct RT-PCR had sufficient sensitivity to detect SARS-CoV-2. They can be acceptable alternative to NPS/OPS for rapid detection of SARS-CoV-2 infections in future.

Swab test in biological fluids as predictor of COVID-19 transmission risk during surgery: a prospective cross-sectional study from an Italian COVID center

BACKGROUND

The contamination of body fluids by Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 during surgery is current matter of debate in the scientific literature concerning CoronaVIrus Disease 2019. Surgical guidelines were published during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic and recommended to avoid laparoscopic surgery as much as possible, in fear that the chimney effect of high flow intraperitoneal gas escape during, and after, the procedure would increase the risk of viral transmission.

AIM

The aim of this study was to evaluate the possibility of SARS-CoV-2 transmission during surgery by searching for viral RNA in serial samplings of biological liquids.

METHODS

This is a single center prospective cross-sectional study. We used a real-time reverse transcriptase (RT) polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test to perform swab tests for the qualitative detection of nucleic acid from SARS-CoV-2 in abdominal fluids, during emergency surgery and on the first post-operative day. In the case of thoracic surgery, we performed a swab test of pleural fluids during chest drainage placement as well as on the first post-operative day.

RESULTS

A total of 20 samples were obtained: 5 from pleural fluids, 13 from peritoneal fluids and two from biliary fluid. All 20 swabs performed from biological fluids resulted negative for SARS-CoV-2 RNA detection.

CONCLUSION

To date, there is no scientific evidence of possible contagion by laparoscopic aerosolization of SARS-CoV-2, neither is certain whether the virus is effectively present in biological fluids.

SARS-CoV-2 Diagnostics Based on Nucleic Acids Amplification: From Fundamental Concepts to Applications and Beyond

COVID-19 pandemic ignited the development of countless molecular methods for the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 based either on nucleic acid, or protein analysis, with the first establishing as the most used for routine diagnosis. The methods trusted for day to day analysis of nucleic acids rely on amplification, in order to enable specific SARS-CoV-2 RNA detection. This review aims to compile the state-of-the-art in the field of nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) used for SARS-CoV-2 detection, either at the clinic level, or at the Point-Of-Care (POC), thus focusing on isothermal and non-isothermal amplification-based diagnostics, while looking carefully at the concerning virology aspects, steps and instruments a test can involve. Following a theme contextualization in introduction, topics about fundamental knowledge on underlying virology aspects, collection and processing of clinical samples pave the way for a detailed assessment of the amplification and detection technologies. In order to address such themes, nucleic acid amplification methods, the different types of molecular reactions used for DNA detection, as well as the instruments requested for executing such routes of analysis are discussed in the subsequent sections. The benchmark of paradigmatic commercial tests further contributes toward discussion, building on technical aspects addressed in the previous sections and other additional information supplied in that part. The last lines are reserved for looking ahead to the future of NAATs and its importance in tackling this pandemic and other identical upcoming challenges.

CRISPR-based Assay Reveals SARS-CoV-2 RNA Dynamic Changes and Redistribution Patterns in Non-Human Primate Model

Mounting evidence indicates that SARS-CoV-2 can infect multiple systemic tissues, but few studies have evaluated SARS-CoV-2 RNA dynamics in multiple specimen types due to their reduced accessibility and diminished performance of RT-qPCR with non-respiratory specimens. Here, we employed an ultrasensitive CRISPR-RT-PCR assay to analyze longitudinal mucosal (nasal, buccal, pharyngeal, and rectal), plasma, and breath samples from SARS-CoV-2-infected non-human primates (NHPs) to detect dynamic changes in SARS-CoV-2 RNA level and distribution among these specimens. We observed that CRISPR-RT-PCR results consistently detected SARS-CoV-2 RNA in all sample types at most time points post-infection, and that SARS-CoV-2 infection dose and administration route did not markedly affect the CRISPR-RT-PCR signal detected in most specimen types. However, consistent RT-qPCR positive results were restricted to nasal, pharyngeal, and rectal swab samples, and tended to decrease earlier than CRISPR-RT-PCR results, reflecting lower assay sensitivity. SARS-CoV-2 RNA was detectable in both pulmonary and extrapulmonary specimens from early to late infection by CRISPR-RT-PCR, albeit with different abundance and kinetics, with SARS-CoV-2 RNA increases detected in plasma and rectal samples trailing those detected in upper respiratory tract samples. CRISPR-RT-PCR assays for SARS-CoV-2 RNA in non-respiratory specimens may thus permit direct diagnosis of suspected COVID-19 cases missed by RT-PCR, while tracking SARS-CoV-2 RNA in minimally invasive alternate specimens may better evaluate the progression and resolution of SARS-CoV-2 infections.

Improving Nasopharyngeal Swab Technique via Simulation for Frontline Workers

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS

Nasopharyngeal swabs currently remain the gold standard for COVID-19 sample collection. A surge in testing volume has resulted in a large number of health care workers who are unfamiliar with nasal anatomy performing this test, which can lead to improper collection practices culminating in false-negative results and complications. Therefore, we aimed to assess the accuracy and educational potential of a realistic 3D-printed nasal swab simulator to expedite health care workers' skill acquisition.

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective pre-post interventional study.

METHODS

A nasal swab task trainer (NSTT) was developed to scale from computed tomography data with a deviated septum. Frontline workers at COVID-19 testing sites in Ontario, Canada, were recruited to use the NSTT for nasopharyngeal swab training. Integrated video recording capability allowed participants to self-evaluate procedure accuracy. A five-point Likert scale was collected regarding the NSTT's educational value and procedural fidelity.

RESULTS

Sixty-two frontline workers included in the study were primarily registered nurses (52%) or paramedics (16%). Following simulator use, self-assessed accuracy improved in 77% of all participants and 100% of participants who expressed low confidence before training. Ninety-four percent reported that the NSTT provided a complete educational experience, and 82% regarded the system as a more effective training approach than what is currently available. Eighty-one indicated that the simulator should be used at all COVID-19 testing sites, with 77% stating province-wide implementation was warranted.

CONCLUSIONS

The nasal swab task trainer is an effective educational tool that appears well-suited for improved skill acquisition in COVID-19 testing and may be useful for training other nasal swab applications.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

3 Laryngoscope, 133:38-42, 2023.

Infection Biomarkers Based on Metabolomics

Current infection biomarkers are highly limited since they have low capability to predict infection in the presence of confounding processes such as in non-infectious inflammatory processes, low capability to predict disease outcomes and have limited applications to guide and evaluate therapeutic regimes. Therefore, it is critical to discover and develop new and effective clinical infection biomarkers, especially applicable in patients at risk of developing severe illness and critically ill patients. Ideal biomarkers would effectively help physicians with better patient management, leading to a decrease of severe outcomes, personalize therapies, minimize antibiotics overuse and hospitalization time, and significantly improve patient survival. Metabolomics, by providing a direct insight into the functional metabolic outcome of an organism, presents a highly appealing strategy to discover these biomarkers. The present work reviews the desired main characteristics of infection biomarkers, the main metabolomics strategies to discover these biomarkers and the next steps for developing the area towards effective clinical biomarkers.

A Practical Approach for Quantitative Polymerase Chain Reaction, the Gold Standard in Microbiological Diagnosis

From gene expression studies to identifying microbes, quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) is widely used in research and medical diagnostics. In transmittable diseases like the Ebola outbreak in West Africa (2014–2016), or the present SARS-CoV2 pandemic qPCR plays a key role in the detection of infected patients. Although the technique itself is decades old with reliable approaches (e.g., TaqMan assay) in the diagnosis of pathogens many people showed distrust in it during the SARS-CoV2 outbreak. This came mainly from not understanding or misunderstanding the principles of qPCR. This situation motivated us to design a simple laboratory practical class, in which students have opportunities to understand the underlying principles of qPCR and its advantages in microbiological diagnosis. Moreover, during the exercise, students can develop skills such as handling experimental assays, and the ability to solve problems, discuss their observations. Finally, this activity brings them closer to the clinical practice and they can see the impact of the science on real life. The class is addressed to undergraduate students of biological sciences.

Importance of Adequate qPCR Controls in Infection Control

Respiratory screening assays lacking Sample Adequacy Controls (SAC) may result in inadequate sample quality and thus false negative results. The non-adequate samples might represent a significant proportion of the total performed tests, thus resulting in sub-optimal infection control measures with implications that may be critical during pandemic times. The quantitative sample adequacy threshold can be established empirically, measuring the change in the frequency of positive results, as a function of the numerical value of “sample adequacy”. Establishing a quantitative threshold for SAC requires a big number/volume of tests to be analyzed in order to have a statistically valid result. Herein, we are offering for the first time clear clinical evidence that a subset of results, which did not pass minimal sample adequacy criteria, have a significantly lower frequency of positivity compared with the “adequate” samples. Flagging these results and/or re-sampling them is a mitigation strategy, which can dramatically improve infection control measures.

SARS-CoV-2/COVID-19 laboratory biosafety practices and current molecular diagnostic tools

The ongoing severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)/coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has crippled several countries across the globe posing a serious global public health challenge. Despite the massive rollout of vaccines, molecular diagnosis remains the most important method for timely isolation, diagnosis, and control of COVID-19. Several molecular diagnostic tools have been developed since the beginning of the pandemic with some even gaining emergency use authorization from the United States (US) Food and Drug Administration for in vitro diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2. Herein, we discuss the working principles of some commonly used molecular diagnostic tools for SARS-CoV-2 including nucleic acid amplification tests, isothermal amplification tests, and rapid diagnostic tests. To ensure successful detection while minimizing the risk of cross-infection and misdiagnosis when using these diagnostic tools, laboratories should adhere to proper biosafety practices. Hence, we also present the common biosafety practices that may ensure the successful detection of SARS-CoV-2 from specimens while protecting laboratory workers and non-suspecting individuals from being infected. From this review article, it is clear that the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has led to an increase in molecular diagnostic tools and the formation of new biosafety protocols that may be important for future and ongoing outbreaks.

Nanopore metagenomic sequencing for detection and characterization of SARS-CoV-2 in clinical samples

OBJECTIVES

The COVID-19 pandemic has underscored the need for rapid novel diagnostic strategies. Metagenomic Next-Generation Sequencing (mNGS) may allow for the detection of pathogens that can be missed in targeted assays. The goal of this study was to assess the performance of nanopore-based Sequence-Independent Single Primer Amplification (SISPA) for the detection and characterization of SARS-CoV-2.

METHODS

We performed mNGS on clinical samples and designed a diagnostic classifier that corrects for barcode crosstalk between specimens. Phylogenetic analysis was performed on genome assemblies.

RESULTS

Our assay yielded 100% specificity overall and 95.2% sensitivity for specimens with a RT-PCR cycle threshold value less than 30. We assembled 10 complete, and one near-complete genomes from 20 specimens that were classified as positive by mNGS. Phylogenetic analysis revealed that 10/11 specimens from British Columbia had a closest relative to another British Columbian specimen. We found 100% concordance between phylogenetic lineage assignment and Variant of Concern (VOC) PCR results. Our assay was able to distinguish between the Alpha and Gamma variants, which was not possible with the current standard VOC PCR being used in British Columbia.

CONCLUSIONS

This study supports future work examining the broader feasibility of nanopore mNGS as a diagnostic strategy for the detection and characterization of viral pathogens.

Multiplex Nucleic Acid Assay of SARS-CoV-2 via a Lanthanide Nanoparticle-Tagging Strategy

Early diagnosis, early isolation, and early treatment are efficient solutions to control the COVID-19 pandemic. To achieve the accurate early diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2, a multiplex detection strategy is required for the cross-validation to solve the problem of "false negative" of the existing gold standard assay. Here, we present a multicomponent nucleic acid assay platform for SARS-CoV-2 detection based on lanthanide nanoparticle (LnNP)-tagging strategy. For targeting SARS-CoV-2's RNA fragments ORF1ab gene, RdRp gene, and E gene, three LnNP probes can be used simultaneously to identify three sites in one sample through elemental mass spectrometry detection with limits of detection of 1.2, 1.3, and 1.3 fmol, respectively. With the multisite cross-validation, we envision that this multiplex and sensitive detection platform may provide an effective strategy for SARS-CoV-2 fast screening with a high accuracy.

Sample collection and transport strategies to enhance yield, accessibility, and biosafety of COVID-19 RT-PCR testing

Introduction. Non-invasive sample collection and viral sterilizing buffers have independently enabled workflows for more widespread COVID-19 testing by reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR).Gap statement. The combined use of sterilizing buffers across non-invasive sample types to optimize sensitive, accessible, and biosafe sampling methods has not been directly and systematically compared.Aim. We aimed to evaluate diagnostic yield across different non-invasive samples with standard viral transport media (VTM) versus a sterilizing buffer eNAT- (Copan diagnostics Murrieta, CA) in a point-of-care diagnostic assay system.Methods. We prospectively collected 84 sets of nasal swabs, oral swabs, and saliva, from 52 COVID-19 RT-PCR-confirmed patients, and nasopharyngeal (NP) swabs from 37 patients. Nasal swabs, oral swabs, and saliva were placed in either VTM or eNAT, prior to testing with the Xpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2 (Xpert). The sensitivity of each sampling strategy was compared using a composite positive standard.Results. Swab specimens collected in eNAT showed an overall superior sensitivity compared to swabs in VTM (70 % vs 57 %, P=0.0022). Direct saliva 90.5 %, (95 % CI: 82 %, 95 %), followed by NP swabs in VTM and saliva in eNAT, was significantly more sensitive than nasal swabs in VTM (50 %, P<0.001) or eNAT (67.8 %, P=0.0012) and oral swabs in VTM (50 %, P<0.0001) or eNAT (58 %, P<0.0001). Saliva and use of eNAT buffer each increased detection of SARS-CoV-2 with the Xpert; however, no single sample matrix identified all positive cases.Conclusion. Saliva and eNAT sterilizing buffer can enhance safe and sensitive detection of COVID-19 using point-of-care GeneXpert instruments.

Differing Sensitivity of COVID-19 PCR Tests and Consequences of the False-negative Report: A Small Observation

The world at large cannot afford to miss even a single case of COVID-19 because of its far-reaching consequences; therefore, the diagnostic development to achieve test with much higher sensitivity should be made available at a mass level as early as possible.

HOW TO CITE THIS ARTICLE

Garg SK. Differing Sensitivity of COVID-19 PCR Tests and Consequences of the False-negative Report: A Small Observation. Indian J Crit Care Med 2021;25(9):1077-1078.

ddPCR increases detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA in patients with low viral loads

RT-qPCR detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA still represents the method of reference to diagnose and monitor COVID-19. From the onset of the pandemic, however, doubts have been expressed concerning the sensitivity of this molecular diagnosis method. Droplet digital PCR (ddPCR) is a third-generation PCR technique that is particularly adapted to detecting low-abundance targets. We developed two-color ddPCR assays for the detection of four different regions of SARS-CoV-2 RNA, including non-structural (IP4-RdRP, helicase) and structural (E, N) protein-encoding sequences. We observed that N or E subgenomic RNAs are generally more abundant than IP4 and helicase RNA sequences in cells infected in vitro, suggesting that detection of the N gene, coding for the most abundant subgenomic RNA of SARS-CoV-2, increases the sensitivity of detection during the highly replicative phase of infection. We investigated 208 nasopharyngeal swabs sampled in March-April 2020 in different hospitals of Greater Paris. We found that 8.6% of informative samples (n = 16/185, P < 0.0001) initially scored as "non-positive" (undetermined or negative) by RT-qPCR were positive for SARS-CoV-2 RNA by ddPCR. Our work confirms that the use of ddPCR modestly, but significantly, increases the proportion of upper airway samples testing positive in the framework of first-line diagnosis of a French population.

Variation in SARS-CoV-2 molecular test sensitivity by specimen types in a large sample of emergency department patients

BACKGROUND

Provider-collected nasopharyngeal specimens for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) molecular testing are the standard of care in many clinical settings, but patient-collected saliva and anterior nares specimens are less invasive and more flexible alternatives. Prior studies comparing specimen types for SARS-CoV-2 molecular testing have been limited by small sample sizes and low pretest probability. We conducted a large observational study among symptomatic adults at 7 emergency departments of Kaiser Permanente Southern California to examine sensitivity of SARS-CoV-2 molecular tests by specimen type and patient characteristics.

METHODS

Provider-collected nasopharyngeal/oropharyngeal (NP/OP) specimens and patient-collected saliva and anterior nares specimens were collected at the same visit and analyzed with the Roche cobas® SARS-CoV-2 assay. Patients were considered truly positive for SARS-CoV-2 if any of the three specimens was positive and negative if all three specimens were negative. Factors associated with discordant and missed positive results were examined with multivariable logistic regression.

RESULTS

Of 2112 patients, 350 (16.6%) were positive for SARS-CoV-2. Sensitivity of NP/OP was 93.7% (95% confidence interval [CI] 90.6%-96.0%), sensitivity of saliva was 87.7% (83.8%-91.0%), and sensitivity of anterior nares was 85.4% (81.3%-89.0%). Patients ages 18-39 years versus ≥40 years were more likely to have discordant results [adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 1.97 (1.12-3.45)], as were patients with <4 symptoms versus ≥4 [aOR 2.43 (1.39-4.25)]. Cycle threshold values were higher for saliva and anterior nares than NP/OP specimens, as well as for specimens in discordant versus concordant sets and patients with fewer symptoms.

CONCLUSION

This study provides robust evidence that patient-collected saliva and anterior nares are sensitive for SARS-CoV-2 molecular testing in emergency department settings, particularly among adults ages ≥40 years and those with multiple symptoms. Higher sensitivity of provider-collected NP/OP specimens must be weighed against the benefits of patient-collected specimens in tailored strategies for SARS-CoV-2 testing.

Repeated Coronavirus Disease 2019 Molecular Testing: Correlation of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Culture With Molecular Assays and Cycle Thresholds

BACKGROUND

Repeated coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) molecular testing can lead to positive test results after negative results and to multiple positive results over time. The association between positive test results and infectious virus is important to quantify.

METHODS

A 2-month cohort of retrospective data and consecutively collected specimens from patients with COVID-19 or patients under investigation were used to understand the correlation between prolonged viral RNA positive test results, cycle threshold (Ct) values and growth of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in cell culture. Whole-genome sequencing was used to confirm virus genotype in patients with prolonged viral RNA detection. Droplet digital polymerase chain reaction was used to assess the rate of false-negative COVID-19 diagnostic test results.

RESULTS

In 2 months, 29 686 specimens were tested and 2194 patients underwent repeated testing. Virus recovery in cell culture was noted in specimens with a mean Ct value of 18.8 (3.4) for SARS-CoV-2 target genes. Prolonged viral RNA shedding was associated with positive virus growth in culture in specimens collected up to 21 days after the first positive result but mostly in individuals symptomatic at the time of sample collection. Whole-genome sequencing provided evidence the same virus was carried over time. Positive test results following negative results had Ct values >29.5 and were not associated with virus culture. Droplet digital polymerase chain reaction results were positive in 5.6% of negative specimens collected from patients with confirmed or clinically suspected COVID-19.

CONCLUSIONS

Low Ct values in SARS-CoV-2 diagnostic tests were associated with virus growth in cell culture. Symptomatic patients with prolonged viral RNA shedding can also be infectious.

Low utilisation of bronchoscopy to assess COVID-19 respiratory infection: a multicenter experience

Objective

For the diagnosis of COVID-19, the yield of nasopharyngeal (NP) swabs is unclear, and bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) is obtained to confirm the diagnosis. We assessed the utilisation of bronchoscopy for COVID-19 diagnosis in a multicenter study and compared the diagnostic yield of BAL versus NP swabs.

Methods

This retrospective study included all patients who were admitted with clinical presentation concerning for COVID-19 and underwent BAL from 1 March to 31 July 2020 at four tertiary care centres in North America. We also compared concordance of BAL with NP swabs for diagnosis of COVID-19 infection.

Results

Fifty-three patients, with clinical suspicion for COVID-19 and admitted for respiratory failure, underwent bronchoscopy to collect BAL for SARS-CoV-2 testing. During the same period, 2039 bronchoscopies were performed on patients not infected with COVID-19. Of 42 patients with NP swabs and BAL collected within ≤7 days, 1 was NP swab negative but positive by BAL for SARS-CoV-2 (n=1/42 (2.4%)). Across a wide array of testing platforms, the overall agreement between NP swabs and BAL results was 97.6% (95% CI: 93.0% to 100%) with Cohen’s k of 0.90 (95% CI: 0.69 to 1.00). The sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values of NP swabs compared with BAL were 83.3% (95% CI: 53.5% to 100%), 100%, 100% and 97.3% (95% CI: 92.1% to 100%), respectively.

Conclusions

BAL was used infrequently to assess COVID-19 in busy institutions. NP swabs have a high concordance with BAL for COVID-19 testing, but negative NP swabs should be confirmed with BAL when clinical suspicion is high.

SARS-CoV-2 and pediatric solid organ transplantation: Current knowns and unknowns

The COVID-19 pandemic has proven to be a challenge in regard to the clinical presentation, prevention, diagnosis, and management of SARS-CoV-2 infection among children who are candidates for and recipients of SOT. By providing scenarios and frequently asked questions encountered in routine clinical practice, this document provides expert opinion and summarizes the available data regarding the prevention, diagnosis, and management of SARS-CoV-2 infection among pediatric SOT candidates and recipients and highlights ongoing knowledge gaps requiring further study. Currently available data are still lacking in the pediatric SOT population, but data have emerged in both the adult SOT and general pediatric population regarding the approach to COVID-19. The document provides expert opinion regarding prevention, diagnosis, and management of SARS-CoV-2 infection among pediatric SOT candidates and recipients.

Repeat virological and serological profiles in hospitalized patients initially tested by nasopharyngeal RT-PCR for SARS-CoV-2

Real‐time polymerase chain reaction (PCR) for SARS‐CoV‐2 is the mainstay of COVID‐19 diagnosis, yet there are conflicting reports on its diagnostic performance. Wide ranges of false‐negative PCR tests have been reported depending on clinical presentation, the timing of testing, specimens tested, testing method, and reference standard used. We aimed to estimate the frequency of discordance between initial nasopharyngeal (NP) PCR and repeat NP sampling PCR and serology in acutely ill patients admitted to the hospital. Panel diagnosis of COVID‐19 infection is further utilized in discordance analysis. Included in the study were 160 patients initially tested by NP PCR with repeat NP sampling PCR and/or serology performed. The percent agreement between initial and repeat PCR was 96.7%, while the percent agreement between initial PCR and serology was 98.9%. There were 5 (3.1%) cases with discordance on repeat testing. After discordance analysis, 2 (1.4%) true cases tested negative on initial PCR. Using available diagnostic methods, discordance on repeat NP sampling PCR and/or serology is a rare occurrence.

Molecular detections of coronavirus: current and emerging methodologies

Introduction: Seven coronavirus species have been identified that can infect humans. While human coronavirus infections had been historically associated with only mild respiratory symptoms similar to the common cold, three coronaviruses identified since 2003, Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus (SARS-CoV), Middle East Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus (MERS-CoV), and SARS-CoV-2, cause life-threatening severe respiratory syndromes. The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by the highly transmissible SARS-CoV-2 has triggered a worldwide health emergency. Due to the lack of effective drugs and vaccination, rapid and reliable detection is of vital importance to control coronavirus epidemics/pandemics.Area covered: A literature search was performed in Pubmed covering the detections and diagnostics of SARS, MERS and SARS-CoV-2. This review summarized the current knowledge of established and emerging methods for coronavirus detection. The characteristics of different diagnostic approaches were described, and the strengths and weaknesses of each method were analyzed and compared. In addition, future trends in the field of coronavirus detection were also discussed.Expert opinion: Nucleic acid-based RT-PCR is the current golden-standard of coronavirus detection, while immunoassays provide history of coronavirus infection besides diagnostic information. Integrated high-throughput system holds the great potential and is the trend of future detection and diagnosis of virus infection.

Evaluation of Cytokines as Robust Diagnostic Biomarkers for COVID-19 Detection

Antigen tests or polymerase chain reaction (PCR) amplification are currently COVID-19 diagnostic tools. However, developing complementary diagnosis tools is mandatory. Thus, we performed a plasma cytokine array in COVID-19 patients to identify novel diagnostic biomarkers. A discovery-validation study in two independent prospective cohorts was performed. The discovery cohort included 136 COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 patients recruited consecutively from 24 March to 11 April 2020. Forty-five cytokines' quantification by the MAGPIX system (Luminex Corp., Austin, TX, USA) was performed in plasma samples. The validation cohort included 117 patients recruited consecutively from 15 to 25 April 2020 for validating results by ELISA. COVID-19 patients showed different levels of multiple cytokines compared to non-COVID-19 patients. A single chemokine, IP-10, accurately identified COVID-19 patients who required hospital admission (AUC: 0.962; 95%CI (0.933-0.992); p < 0.001)). The results were validated in an independent cohort by multivariable analysis (OR: 25.573; 95%CI (8.127-80.469); p < 0.001) and AUROC (AUC: 0.900; 95%CI (0.846-0.954); p < 0.001). Moreover, showing IP-10 plasma levels over 173.35 pg/mL identified COVID-19 with higher sensitivity (86.20%) than the first SARS-CoV-2 PCR. Our discover-validation study identified IP-10 as a robust biomarker in clinical practice for COVID-19 diagnosis at hospital. Therefore, IP-10 could be used as a complementary tool in clinical practice, especially in emergency departments.

SARS-CoV-2 RNA Quantification Using Droplet Digital RT-PCR

Quantitative viral load assays have transformed our understanding of viral diseases. They hold similar potential to advance COVID-19 control and prevention, but SARS-CoV-2 viral load tests are not yet widely available. SARS-CoV-2 molecular diagnostic tests, which typically employ real-time RT-PCR, yield semiquantitative results only. Droplet digital RT-PCR (RT-ddPCR) offers an attractive platform for SARS-CoV-2 RNA quantification. Eight primer/probe sets originally developed for real-time RT-PCR–based SARS-CoV-2 diagnostic tests were evaluated for use in RT-ddPCR; three were identified as the most efficient, precise, and sensitive for RT-ddPCR–based SARS-CoV-2 RNA quantification. For example, the analytical efficiency for the E-Sarbeco primer/probe set was approximately 83%, whereas assay precision, measured as the coefficient of variation, was approximately 2% at 1000 input copies/reaction. Lower limits of quantification and detection for this primer/probe set were 18.6 and 4.4 input SARS-CoV-2 RNA copies/reaction, respectively. SARS-CoV-2 RNA viral loads in a convenience panel of 48 COVID-19–positive diagnostic specimens spanned a 6.2log₁₀ range, confirming substantial viral load variation in vivo. RT-ddPCR–derived SARS-CoV-2 E gene copy numbers were further calibrated against cycle threshold values from a commercial real-time RT-PCR diagnostic platform. This log-linear relationship can be used to mathematically derive SARS-CoV-2 RNA copy numbers from cycle threshold values, allowing the wealth of available diagnostic test data to be harnessed to address foundational questions in SARS-CoV-2 biology.

Laboratory medicine in the COVID-19 era: six lessons for the future

The lockdown due to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), a major healthcare challenge, is a worldwide threat to public health, social stability, and economic development. The pandemic has affected all aspects of society, dramatically changing our day-to-day lives and habits. It has also changed clinical practice, including practices of clinical laboratories. After one year, it is time to rethink what has happened, and is still happening, in order to learn lessons for the future of laboratory medicine and its professionals. While examining this issue, I was inspired by Italo Calvino's famous work, "Six memos for the next millennium".But I rearranged the Author's six memos into "Visibility, quickness, exactitude, multiplicity, lightness, consistency".

Assessment of Multiplex Digital Droplet RT-PCR as a Diagnostic Tool for SARS-CoV-2 Detection in Nasopharyngeal Swabs and Saliva Samples

BACKGROUND

Reverse transcription-quantitative PCR on nasopharyngeal swabs is currently the reference COVID-19 diagnosis method but exhibits imperfect sensitivity.

METHODS

We developed a multiplex reverse transcription-digital droplet PCR (RT-ddPCR) assay, targeting 6 SARS-CoV-2 genomic regions, and evaluated it on nasopharyngeal swabs and saliva samples collected from 130 COVID-19 positive or negative ambulatory individuals, who presented symptoms suggestive of mild or moderate SARS-CoV2 infection.

RESULTS

For the nasopharyngeal swab samples, the results obtained using the 6-plex RT-ddPCR and RT-qPCR assays were all concordant. The 6-plex RT-ddPCR assay was more sensitive than RT-qPCR (85% versus 62%) on saliva samples from patients with positive nasopharyngeal swabs.

CONCLUSION

Multiplex RT-ddPCR represents an alternative and complementary tool for the diagnosis of COVID-19, in particular to control RT-qPCR ambiguous results. It can also be applied to saliva for repetitive sampling and testing individuals for whom nasopharyngeal swabbing is not possible.

Comparison of Digital PCR and Quantitative PCR with Various SARS-CoV-2 Primer-Probe Sets

The World Health Organization (WHO) has declared the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) as an international health emergency. Current diagnostic tests are based on the reverse transcription-quantitative polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR) method, which is the gold standard test that involves the amplification of viral RNA. However, the RT-qPCR assay has limitations in terms of sensitivity and quantification. In this study, we tested both qPCR and droplet digital PCR (ddPCR) to detect low amounts of viral RNA. The cycle threshold (C_T) of the viral RNA by RT-PCR significantly varied according to the sequences of the primer and probe sets with in vitro transcript (IVT) RNA or viral RNA as templates, whereas the copy number of the viral RNA by ddPCR was effectively quantified with IVT RNA, cultured viral RNA, and RNA from clinical samples. Furthermore, the clinical samples were assayed via both methods, and the sensitivity of the ddPCR was determined to be equal to or more than that of the RT-qPCR. However, the ddPCR assay is more suitable for determining the copy number of reference materials. These findings suggest that the qPCR assay with the ddPCR defined reference materials could be used as a highly sensitive and compatible diagnostic method for viral RNA detection.

Correctly performed nasal swabs

BACKGROUND

As the incidence of new cases of coronavirus disease increased exponentially, the use of viral swabs to collect nasopharyngeal specimens are increasing drastically. Therefore, healthcare workers military staff and uneducated nonprofessional's were ordered to make this swabs. Subsequently case reports reported about basal skull perforation, cerebrospinal fluid fistula and injury due to an incorrect technique.

METHODS

Search of the literature.

RESULTS

Only in 44% of the videos (Youtube) nasal swabs were correctly performed. Due to an false technique biological sampling resulted in false-negative COVID-19 tests.

CONCLUSION

Although professional societies started to report about this unacceptable situation, no publication reported about this health endangerment. In this time of overwhelming information and diversity of opinions, it is necessary to report about this in the hope, all media and TV reports will follow this article to show correctly performed nasal swabs to reduce false-negative COVID-19 tests and injury.

SalivaDirect: A simplified and flexible platform to enhance SARS-CoV-2 testing capacity

BACKGROUND

Scaling SARS-CoV-2 testing to meet demands of safe reopenings continues to be plagued by assay costs and supply chain shortages. In response, we developed SalivaDirect, which received Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

METHODS

We simplified our saliva-based diagnostic test by (1) not requiring collection tubes with preservatives, (2) replacing nucleic acid extraction with a simple enzymatic and heating step, and (3) testing specimens with a dualplex qRT-PCR assay. Moreover, we validated SalivaDirect with reagents and instruments from multiple vendors to minimize supply chain issues.

FINDINGS

From our hospital cohort, we show a high positive agreement (94%) between saliva tested with SalivaDirect and nasopharyngeal swabs tested with a commercial qRT-PCR kit. In partnership with the National Basketball Association (NBA) and National Basketball Players Association (NBPA), we tested 3,779 saliva specimens from healthy individuals and detected low rates of invalid (0.3%) and false-positive (<0.05%) results.

CONCLUSIONS

We demonstrate that saliva is a valid alternative to swabs for SARS-CoV-2 screening and that SalivaDirect can make large-scale testing more accessible and affordable. Uniquely, we can designate other laboratories to use our sensitive, flexible, and simplified platform under our EUA (https://publichealth.yale.edu/salivadirect/).

FUNDING

This study was funded by the NBA and NBPA (N.D.G.), the Huffman Family Donor Advised Fund (N.D.G.), a Fast Grant from Emergent Ventures at the Mercatus Center at George Mason University (N.D.G.), the Yale Institute for Global Health (N.D.G.), and the Beatrice Kleinberg Neuwirth Fund (A.I.K.). C.B.F.V. is supported by NWO Rubicon 019.181EN.004.

Microchip RT-PCR Detection of Nasopharyngeal SARS-CoV-2 Samples

Fast, accurate, and reliable diagnostic tests are critical for controlling the spread of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) associated with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. The current gold standard for testing is real-time PCR; however, during the current pandemic, supplies of testing kits and reagents have been limited. We report the validation of a rapid (30 minutes), user-friendly, and accurate microchip real-time PCR assay for detection of SARS-CoV-2 from nasopharyngeal swab RNA extracts. Microchips preloaded with COVID-19 primers and probes for the N gene accommodate 1.2-μL reaction volumes, lowering the required reagents by 10-fold compared with tube-based real-time PCR. We validated our assay using contrived reference samples and 21 clinical samples from patients in Canada, determining a limit of detection of 1 copy per reaction. The microchip real-time PCR provides a significantly lower resource alternative to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention–approved real-time RT-PCR assays with comparable sensitivity, showing 100% positive and negative predictive agreement of clinical samples.