Back

Clinical validation of innovative, low cost, kit-free, RNA processing protocol for RT-PCR based COVID-19 testing.

Sahajpal, N. S.; Mondal, A. K.; Njau, A.; Ananth, S.; Kothandaraman, A.; Hegde, M.; Chaubey, A.; Padala, S.; Kota, V.; Caspary, K.; Tompkins, S. M.; Ross, T. M.; Rojiani, A. M.; Kolhe, R.

2020-07-30 pathology Community evaluation
10.1101/2020.07.28.20163626 medRxiv
Show abstract

The current gold-standard molecular diagnosis for COVID-19 is based on a multi-step assay involving RNA-extraction and RT-PCR analysis for the detection of SARS-CoV-2. RNA-extraction step has been a major rate-limiting step in implementing high-throughput screening for COVID-19 during this pandemic. Moreover, clinical laboratories are facing several challenges that include cost, reagents, instrumentation, turn-around time, trained personnel, and supply-chain constraints to efficiently implement and sustain testing. Cognizant of these limitations, we evaluated the extraction-free methods described in the literature and have developed an innovative, simplified and easy protocol employing limited reagents to extract RNA for subsequent RT-PCR analysis. Nasopharyngeal-swab samples were subjected to the following individual conditions: 65{degrees}C for 15 minutes; 80{degrees}C for 5 minutes; 90{degrees}C for 5 minutes or 80{degrees}C for 1 minute, and processed for direct RT-PCR. These groups were also compared with a supplemental protocol adding isopropanol-ethanol-water elution steps followed by RT-PCR assay. The direct RT-PCR assay did not detect SARS-CoV-2 within the various temperature incubation only groups, whereas, the 90{degrees}C for 5 minutes-isopropanol-ethanol-water method was found to be comparable to the FDA-EUA method. Evaluation of the performance metrics for 100 clinical samples demonstrated a sensitivity of 94.2% and a specificity of 100%. The limit of detection was ascertained to be [~]40 copies/ml by absolute-quantification. The protocol presented for this assay employs limited reagents and yields results with high sensitivity. Additionally, it presents a simplified methodology that would be easier to implement in laboratories in limited resource countries in order to meet the high current COVID-19 testing needs.

Matching journals

The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.