Comparison study of commercial COVID-19 RT-PCR kits propose an approach to evaluate their performances
Krismawati, H.; Mahendra, C.; Hartanto, A.; Rokhmad, M. F.; Sandi, S.; Irwanto, A.
Show abstract
With the increasing number of COVID-19 cases in Indonesia, scalable and high-throughput diagnostic testing is essential nationwide. Currently, RT-PCR has been the preferred method of viral detection and many manufacturers offer commercial kits for routine clinical diagnostics. In response to the incoming of various kits, there is a need to assess their performance and compatibility of use in clinical laboratories. Kit characteristics impact the testing workflow of these laboratories and some factors can render a kit to perform sub-optimally, leading to false results that are misleading for public safety. Here, we evaluated six commercial kits that are predominantly distributed to appointed testing facilities across Indonesia. Their performance was assessed based on their ease of use, availability, robustness and accuracy for scalable testing in a manual set-up. Our findings demonstrated that all six kits are suitable for use in routine diagnostics, but their considerations for use may vary according to different use-cases. To better guide considerations in procurement of kits, our study provided a systematic approach for laboratories to assess the performance of new incoming kits.
Matching journals
The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Evaluating diagnostic accuracies of Panbio ™ COVID-19 rapid antigen test and RT-PCR for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia using Bayesian Latent-Class Models (BLCM) 97%
- Development And Performance Evaluation of A Rapid In-House ELISA for Retrospective Serosurveillance of SARS-CoV-2 97%
- SARS-CoV-2 detection in multi-sample pools in a real pandemic scenario: a screening strategy of choice for active surveillance 97%
Similar papers in this journal
- Evaluation of three rapid lateral flow antigen detection tests for the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection 98%
- 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%
- Evaluation of a fully automated high-throughput SARS-CoV-2 multiplex qPCR assay with build-in screening functionality for DelHV69/70- and N501Y variants such as B.1.1.7 95%
Similar papers in this journal
- Evaluation of commercial qPCR kits for detection of SARS-CoV-2 in pooled samples 97%
- Evaluation and modelling of the performance of an automated SARS-CoV-2 antigen assay according to sample type, target population and epidemic trends 95%
- A simple, cost-effective and extraction-free molecular diagnostic test for sickle cell disease in noninvasive buccal swab specimen for a limited-resource setting 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- Test Agreement Between Roche Cobas 6800 and Cepheid GeneXpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2 Assays at High Cycle Threshold Ranges 96%
- Analytical and Clinical Comparison of Three Nucleic Acid Amplification Tests for SARS-CoV-2 Detection 95%
- Comparison of Commercially Available and Laboratory Developed Assays for in vitro Detection of SARS-CoV-2 in Clinical Laboratories 95%
Similar papers in this journal
- Evaluation of seven different rapid methods for nucleic acid detection of SARS-COV-2 virus 98%
- Real-life performance of a novel antigen detection test on nasopharyngeal specimens for SARS-CoV-2 infection diagnosis: a prospective study 96%
- Validation and Performance Comparison of Three SARS-CoV-2 Antibody Assays 95%
"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.