Back

Development Optimization and Validation of RT-LAMP based COVID-19 Facility in Pakistan

Haq, F.; Sharif, S.; Khurshid, A.; Shabbir, I.; Salman, M.; Badar, N.; Ikram, A.; Ahad, A.; Malik, M. F.

2020-05-29 molecular biology
10.1101/2020.05.29.124123 bioRxiv
Show abstract

The pandemic SARS-CoV-2 (Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2) has created a widespread panic across the globe especially in the developing countries like Pakistan. The lack of resources and technical staff are causing havoc challenges in the detection and prevention of this global outbreak. Therefore, a less expensive and massive screening of suspected individuals for COVID-19 is required. In this study, a user-friendly technique of reverse transcription-loop mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) was designed and validated to suggest a potential RT-qPCR alternate for rapid testing of COVID-19 suspected individuals. A total of 12 COVID-19 negative and 72 COVID-19 suspected individuals were analyzed. Both RT-qPCR and RT-LAMP assays were performed for all the individuals using open reading frame (ORF 1ab), nucleoprotein (N) and Spike (S) genes. All 12 specimens which were negative using RT-qPCR were also found negative using RT-LAMP assay. Overall 62 out of 72 positive samples (detected using RT-qPCR) were found COVID-19 positive using RT-LAMP assay. Interestingly all samples (45) having Ct values less than 30 showed 100% sensitivity. However, samples with weaker Ct values (i.e., => 35) showed 54% concordance, suggesting potential false negatives or false positives in RT-LAMP or RT-qPCR results, respectively. Overall comparative assessment showed that RT-LAMP assay showed strong sensitivity and specificity and can be used as an alternative strategy for rapid COVID-19 testing. Hence, based on fast processing time, minimal risk of specimens transfer and utilizing available resources, LAMP based detection of COVID-19 is strongly advocated especially for developing countries.

Matching journals

The top 10 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
PLOS ONE
5266 papers in training set
Top 9%
18.9%
2
Diagnostics
50 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
5.6%
3
Access Microbiology
25 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
5.3%
4
Scientific Reports
3612 papers in training set
Top 25%
4.1%
5
Pathogens
56 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.6%
6
Biology Methods and Protocols
61 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
3.3%
7
Heliyon
152 papers in training set
Top 1%
3.3%
8
Journal of Clinical Microbiology
130 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
3.2%
9
Medical Research Archives
11 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
2.7%
10
Informatics in Medicine Unlocked
22 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
2.5%
50% of probability mass above
11
Frontiers in Public Health
148 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.4%
12
Journal of Virological Methods
37 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
2.2%
13
Journal of Medical Virology
140 papers in training set
Top 1%
2.0%
14
Microorganisms
106 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.9%
15
Journal of Microbiological Methods
13 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.9%
16
Viruses
332 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.8%
17
Frontiers in Cellular and Infection Microbiology
109 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.7%
18
Microbiology Spectrum
469 papers in training set
Top 7%
1.5%
19
Emerging Infectious Diseases
105 papers in training set
Top 1.0%
1.5%
20
Current Microbiology
18 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.5%
21
Molecular Biology Reports
21 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
1.2%
22
BMC Research Notes
33 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
1.2%
23
International Journal of Infectious Diseases
129 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.2%
24
F1000Research
88 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.1%
25
Vaccines
198 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.9%
26
Epidemiology and Infection
89 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.9%
27
Virology
61 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.9%
28
Genomics
64 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.9%
29
BioMed Research International
28 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.9%
30
Virology Journal
32 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
0.9%