Look before diving into pooling of SARS-CoV-2 samples on high throughput analyzers
LeBlanc, J. J.; Patriquin, G.; Pettipas, J.; Warhuus, M.; Sarty, D.; Jackson, C.; Heinstein, C.; MacDonald, J.; Haldane, D.; Hatchette, T. F.
Show abstract
Given the unprecedented demand for SARS-CoV-2 testing during the COVID-19 pandemic, the benefits of specimen pooling have recently been explored. As previous studies were limited to mathematical modeling or testing on low throughput PCR instruments, this study aimed to assess pooling on high throughput analyzers. To assess the impact of pooling, SARS-CoV-2 dilutions were performed at varying pool depths (i.e. 1:2, 1:4, and 1:8) into test-negative nasopharyngeal or oropharynx/anterior nares swabs matrix. Testing was evaluated on the automated Roche Cobas 6800 system, or the Roche MagNApure LC 2.0 or MagNAPure 96 instruments paired with a laboratory-developed test using a 96-well PCR format. The frequency of detection in specimens with low viral loads was evaluated using archived specimens collected throughout the first pandemic wave. The proportion of detectable results per pool depths was used to estimate the potential impact. In addition, workflow at the analytical stage, and pre-and post-stages of testing were also considered. The current study estimated that pool depths of 1:2, 1:4, and 1:8 would have allowed the detection of 98.3%, 96.0%, and 92.6% of positive SARS-CoV-2 results identified in the first wave of the pandemic in Nova Scotia. Overall, this study demonstrated that pooling on high throughput instrumentation can dramatically increase the overall testing capacity to meet increased demands, with little compromising to sensitivity at low pool depths. However, the human resources required at the pre-analytical stage of testing is a particular challenging to achieve.
Matching journals
The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- Clinical evaluation of a SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR assay on a fully automated system for rapid on-demand testing in the hospital setting 95%
- Is the glass half full? Extraction-free RT-LAMP to detect SARS-CoV-2 is less sensitive but highly specific compared to standard RT-PCR in 101 samples 95%
- Safe and effective pool testing for SARS-CoV-2 detection 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- Recommendations for sample pooling on the Cepheid GeneXpert(R) system using the Cepheid Xpert(R) Xpress SARS-CoV-2 assay 96%
- An international, interlaboratory ring trial confirms the feasibility of an open-source, extraction-less “direct” RT-qPCR method for reliable detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA in clinical samples 95%
- Evaluation of SARS-CoV-2 Antibody Point of Care Devices in the Laboratory and Clinical Setting 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- Analytical comparison of over-the-counter multiplex tests for influenza A, influenza B and SARS-CoV-2 96%
- Performance of the Cue COVID-19 Molecular Test for Point of Care: Insights from a multi-site clinic service model 96%
- A Reagent and Virus Benchmarking Panel for a Uniform Analytical Performance Assessment of N Antigen–Based Diagnostic Tests for COVID-19 95%
Similar papers in this journal
- Analytical Performance of the AMDI Fast PCR Mini Respiratory Panel 95%
- Comparative study of four SARS-CoV-2 Nucleic Acid Amplification Test (NAAT) platforms demonstrates that ID NOW performance is impaired substantially by patient and specimen type. 94%
- Field performance of NowCheck rapid antigen test for SARS-CoV-2 in Kisumu County, western Kenya 93%
"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.