4.6 Article

Limitation of Screening of Different Variants of SARS-CoV-2 by RT-PCR

期刊

DIAGNOSTICS
卷 11, 期 7, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/diagnostics11071241

关键词

SARS-CoV-2; RT-PCR; screening method; variants

资金

  1. Nimes University hospital

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study evaluated an RT-PCR kit for screening SARS-CoV-2 variants in France, with 4.1% of samples suspected to belong to B.1.351 or P.1 variants, but only 75.8% confirmed as B.1.351. Mutations near the H69/V70 deletion in the S-gene were found in samples of the UK variant, impacting the detection.
Since January 2021, the diffusion of the most propagated SARS-CoV-2 variants in France (UK variant 20I/501Y.V1 (lineage B.1.1.7), 20H/H501Y.V2 (lineage B.1.351) and 20J/H501Y.V3 (lineage P.1)) were urgently screened, needing a surveillance with an RT-PCR screening assay. In this study, we evaluated one RT-PCR kit for this screening (ID SARS-CoV-2/UK/SA Variant Triplex(R), ID Solutions, Grabels, France) on 2207 nasopharyngeal samples that were positive for SARS-CoV-2. Using ID Solutions kit, 4.1% (92/2207) of samples were suspected to belonged to B.1.351 or P.1 variants. Next-generation sequencing that was performed on 67.4% (62/92) of these samples confirmed the presence of a B.1.351 variant in only 75.8% of the samples (47/62). Thirteen samples belonged to the UK variant (B.1.1.7), and two to A.27 with N501Y mutation. The thirteen with the UK variant presented one mutation in the S-gene, near the Delta H69/Delta V70 deletion (S71F or A67S), which impacted the detection of Delta H69/Delta V70 deletion. Using another screening kit (PKampVariantDetect SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR combination 1 and 3 (R) PerkinElmer, Waltham, MA, USA) on the misidentified samples, we observed that the two mutations, S71F or A67S, did not impact the detection of the UK variant. In conclusion, this study highlights the limitations of the screening strategy based on the detection of few mutations/deletions as well as it not being able to follow the virus evolution.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据