4.4 Article

Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (BARS-CoV-2) Genome Sequencing from Post-Mortem Formalin-Fixed, Paraffin-Embedded Lung Tissues

Journal

JOURNAL OF MOLECULAR DIAGNOSTICS
Volume 23, Issue 9, Pages 1065-1077

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jmoldx.2021.05.016

Keywords

-

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study validates the feasibility of SARS-CoV-2 genome sequencing on FFPE lung tissues from deceased COVID-19 patients.
Implementation of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) testing in the daily practice of pathology laboratories requires procedure adaptation to formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded (FFPE) samples. So far, one study reported the feasibility of SARS-CoV-2 genome sequencing on FFPE tissues with only one contributory case of two. This study optimized SARS-CoV-2 genome sequencing using the Ion AmpliSeq SARS-CoV-2 Panel on 22 FFPE lung tissues from 16 deceased coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients. SARS-CoV-2 was detected in all FFPE blocks using a real-time RT-qPCR targeting the E gene with crossing point (Cp) values ranging from 16.02 to 34.16. Sequencing was considered as contributory (i.e. with a uniformity >55%) for 17 FFPE blocks. Adapting the number of target amplification PCR cycles according to the RT-qPCR Cp values allowed optimization of the sequencing quality for the contributory blocks (i.e. 20 PCR cycles for blocks with a Cp value <28 and 25 PCR cycles for blocks with a Cp value between 28 and 30). Most blocks with a Cp value >30 were non-contributory. Comparison of matched frozen and FFPE tissues revealed discordance for only three FFPE blocks, all with a Cp value >28. Variant identification and Glade classification was possible for 13 patients. This study validates SARS-CoV-2 genome sequencing on FFPE blocks and opens the possibility to explore correlation between virus genotype and histopathologic lesions.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available