Back

The Potential Use of Unprocessed Sample for RT-qPCR Detection of COVID-19 without an RNA Extraction Step

Arumugam, A.; Wong, S. S.

2020-04-08 molecular biology
10.1101/2020.04.06.028811 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Quantitative reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR) assay is the gold standard recommended to test for acute SARS-CoV-2 infection.1-4 It has been used by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and several other companies in their Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) assays. With many PCR-based molecular assays, an extraction step is routinely used as part of the protocol. This step can take up a significant amount of time and labor, especially if the extraction is performed manually. Long assay time, partly caused by slow sample preparation steps, has created a large backlog when testing patient samples suspected of COVID-19. Using flu and RSV clinical specimens, we have collected evidence that the RT-qPCR assay can be performed directly on patient sample material from a nasal swab immersed in virus transport medium (VTM) without an RNA extraction step. We have also used this approach to test for the direct detection of SARS-CoV-2 reference materials spiked in VTM. Our data, while preliminary, suggest that using a few microliters of these untreated samples still can lead to sensitive test results. If RNA extraction steps can be omitted without significantly affecting clinical sensitivity, the turn-around time of COVID-19 tests and the backlog we currently experience can be reduced drastically. Next, we will confirm our findings using patient samples.

Matching journals

The top 8 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Journal of Clinical Microbiology
120 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
12.3%
2
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 18%
6.4%
3
Clinical Chemistry
22 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
6.4%
4
Diagnostic Microbiology and Infectious Disease
21 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
6.4%
5
Diagnostics
48 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
6.4%
6
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 28%
6.3%
7
Microbiology Spectrum
435 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
4.8%
8
Pathogens
53 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
3.6%
50% of probability mass above
9
The Journal of Molecular Diagnostics
36 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
2.9%
10
Eurosurveillance
80 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
2.7%
11
Viruses
318 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.7%
12
Journal of Microbiological Methods
11 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
2.6%
13
Talanta
12 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
2.4%
14
BioTechniques
24 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.7%
15
PeerJ
261 papers in training set
Top 8%
1.5%
16
Frontiers in Public Health
140 papers in training set
Top 5%
1.5%
17
Transboundary and Emerging Diseases
34 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.2%
18
Journal of Virological Methods
36 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.2%
19
The Journal of Infectious Diseases
182 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.2%
20
Biochemical and Biophysical Research Communications
78 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.9%
21
Journal of Medical Virology
137 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.8%
22
Frontiers in Medicine
113 papers in training set
Top 6%
0.8%
23
Frontiers in Virology
15 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
0.8%
24
Virology Journal
25 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.7%
25
mSphere
281 papers in training set
Top 6%
0.7%
26
The American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene
60 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.6%
27
Microorganisms
101 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.6%