Point of care testing for detection of coronaviruses including SARS-CoV-2 from saliva without treating RNA in advance
Muraoka, M.; Kawaguchi, O.; Mizukoshi, M.; Sejima, S.
Show abstract
Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak was reported to the WHO (World Health Organization) as an outbreak on end of 2019, afterwards pandemic on the worldwide in 2020. Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has be reported it to cause COVID-19, and highly transmissible. Therefore, it is important that it is rapidly and continuously detected and monitored on site so that the infection is prevented. Namely, POCT (point of care testing) may be important to control cross infection of SARS-CoV-2. At present, the routine confirmation of SARS-CoV-2 is based on detection of sequence unique in the virus RNA by nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) such as rRT-PCR. Taking POCT into account, it is clear that it takes time and labour very much or much. Thus, it was our purpose this time to contribute to develop POCT for microbes such as SARS-CoV-2, and thus needed to improve NAATs method. First, combining the mobile real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR) device PCR1100 with the appropriate rRT-PCR reagent, we found that it is possible to detect RNA of SARS-CoV-2 for less 14 minutes with equivalent accuracy to conventional devices. Next, we found that the above method made it possible for us to detect coronaviruses by direct rRT-PCR without pre-treatments. Furthermore, it also made clear that coronaviruses in saliva could be detected by the similar direct rRT-PCR method. Hence, it was concluded that this method made it possible to detect virus in saliva without treating in advance (extraction, purification, concentration, etc.), and moreover, samples would be able to be collected with non-invasive. For this reason, we suggest that this method is useful for POCT of coronaviruses including SARS-CoV-2.
Matching journals
The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- SARS-CoV-2 detection in multi-sample pools in a real pandemic scenario: a screening strategy of choice for active surveillance 96%
- Evaluation of GENECUBE ® HQ SARS-CoV-2 for anterior nasal samples and saliva samples with a new rapid examination protocol 96%
- Validation of a Novel Molecular Assay to the Diagnostic of COVID-19 Based on Real Time PCR with High Resolution Melting 96%
Similar papers in this journal
- Evaluation of seven different rapid methods for nucleic acid detection of SARS-COV-2 virus 97%
- Detection of SARS-CoV-2 in Different Human Biofluids Using the Loop-Mediated Isothermal Amplification Assay: A Prospective Diagnostic Study in Fortaleza, Brazil 95%
- Real-life performance of a novel antigen detection test on nasopharyngeal specimens for SARS-CoV-2 infection diagnosis: a prospective study 95%
Similar papers in this journal
- Diagnostic performance of a novel digital immunoassay (RapidTesta SARS-CoV-2): a prospective observational study with 1,127 nasopharyngeal samples 97%
- Clinical Evaluation of the Novel Rapid Nucleic Acid Amplification Point-of-Care Test (Smart Gene SARS-CoV-2) in the analysis of Nasopharyngeal and Anterior Nasal samples 96%
- Evaluation and clinical implications of the time to a positive results of antigen testing for SARS-CoV-2 96%
Similar papers in this journal
- Evaluation of commercial qPCR kits for detection of SARS-CoV-2 in pooled samples 96%
- SalivaSTAT: Direct-PCR and pooling of saliva samples collected in healthcare and community setting for SARS-CoV-2 mass surveillance 95%
- Evaluation and modelling of the performance of an automated SARS-CoV-2 antigen assay according to sample type, target population and epidemic trends 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- Evaluation of three rapid lateral flow antigen detection tests for the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection 97%
- Rapid and simultaneous identification of three mutations by the Novaplex™ SARS-CoV-2 Variants I Assay kit 96%
- Evaluation of a SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen test: potential to help reduce community spread? 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.