3.8 Article

Analytic Sensitivity of 3 Nucleic Acid Detection Assays in Diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 Infection

Journal

JOURNAL OF APPLIED LABORATORY MEDICINE
Volume 6, Issue 2, Pages 421-428

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1093/jalm/jfaa187

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The study found that SARS-CoV-2 was detected in 27% of clinical specimens, with estimated viral concentrations widely distributed and 17% of positive individuals having concentrations <845 copies/mL. Positive percent agreement was strongly related to viral concentration, with GeneXpert showing reliable detection (>95%) at concentrations >100 copies/mL compared to ARIES LDT. ARIES LDT may have higher false-negative rates due to its lower sensitivity at lower viral concentrations.
Background: Detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) by reverse transcription PCR is the primary method to diagnose coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, the analytic sensitivity required is not well defined and it is unclear how available assays compare. Methods: For the Abbott RealTime SARS-CoV-2 assay (m2000; Abbott Molecular), we determined that it could detect viral concentrations as low as 26 copies/mL, we defined the relationship between cycle number and viral concentrations, and we tested naso- and oropharyngeal swab specimens from 8538 consecutive individuals. Using the m2000 as a reference assay method, we described the distribution of viral concentrations in these patients. We then used selected clinical specimens to determine the positive percent agreement of 2 other assays with more rapid turnaround times [Cepheid Xpert Xpress (GeneXpert; Cepheid); n = 27] and a laboratory developed test on the Luminex ARIES system [ARIES LDT (Luminex); n = 50] as a function of virus concentrations, from which we projected their false-negative rates in our patient population. Results: SARS-CoV-2 was detected in 27% (95% CI: 26%-28%) of all specimens. Estimated viral concentrations were widely distributed, and 17% (95% CI: 16%-19%) of positive individuals had viral concentrations <845 copies/mL. Positive percent agreement was strongly related to viral concentration, and reliable detection (i.e., >95%) was observed at concentrations >100 copies/mL for the GeneXpert but not the ARIES LDT, corresponding to projected false-negative rates of 4% (95% CI: 0%-21%) and 27% (95% CI: 11%-46%), respectively. Conclusions: Substantial proportions of clinical specimens have low to moderate viral concentrations and may be missed by methods with less analytic sensitivity.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available