Cargando…
Standardization and Comparison of Emergency Use Authorized COVID-19 Assays and Testing Laboratories.
MOTIVATION: The motivation for this work was the need to establish a predefined cutoff based on genome copies per ml (GE/ml) rather than Ct, which can vary depending on the laboratory and assay used. A GE/ml-based threshold was necessary to define what constituted ‘low positives” for samples that we...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10659510/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37986832 http://dx.doi.org/10.1101/2023.11.08.23297633 |
_version_ | 1785148330866638848 |
---|---|
author | Rao, Anuradha Lin, Jessica Parsons, Richard Greenleaf, Morgan Westbrook, Adrianna Lai, Eric Bowers, Heather B. McClendon, Kaleb O’Sick, William Baugh, Tyler Sifford, Markayla Sullivan, Julie A. Lam, Wilbur A. Bassit, Leda |
author_facet | Rao, Anuradha Lin, Jessica Parsons, Richard Greenleaf, Morgan Westbrook, Adrianna Lai, Eric Bowers, Heather B. McClendon, Kaleb O’Sick, William Baugh, Tyler Sifford, Markayla Sullivan, Julie A. Lam, Wilbur A. Bassit, Leda |
author_sort | Rao, Anuradha |
collection | PubMed |
description | MOTIVATION: The motivation for this work was the need to establish a predefined cutoff based on genome copies per ml (GE/ml) rather than Ct, which can vary depending on the laboratory and assay used. A GE/ml-based threshold was necessary to define what constituted ‘low positives” for samples that were included in data sets submitted to the FDA for emergency use approval for SARS-CoV-2 antigen tests. SUMMARY: SARS-CoV-2, the causal agent of the global COVID-19 pandemic, made its appearance at the end of 2019 and is still circulating in the population. The pandemic led to an urgent need for fast, reliable, and widely available testing. After December 2020, the emergence of new variants of SARS-CoV-2 led to additional challenges since new and existing tests had to detect variants to the same extent as the original Wuhan strain. When an antigen-based test is submitted to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) consideration it is benchmarked against PCR comparator assays, which yield cycle threshold (C(T)) data as an indirect indicator of viral load – the lower the C(T), the higher the viral load of the sample and the higher the C(T), the lower the viral load. The FDA mandates that 10–20% of clinical samples used to evaluate the antigen test have to be low positive. Low positive, as defined by the FDA, are clinical samples in which the C(T) of the SARS-CoV-2 target gene is within 3 C(T) of the mean C(T) value of the approved comparator test’s Limit of Detection (LOD). While all comparator tests are PCR-based, the results from different PCR assays used are not uniform. Results vary depending on assay platform, target gene, LOD and laboratory methodology. The emergence and dominance of the Omicron variant further challenged this approach as the fraction of low positive clinical samples dramatically increased as compared to earlier SARS-CoV-2 variants. This led to 20–40% of clinical samples having high C(T) values and therefore assays vying for an EUA were failing to achieve the 80% Percent Positive Agreement (PPA) threshold required. Here we describe the methods and statistical analyses used to establish a predefined cutoff, based on genome copies per ml (GE/ml) to classify samples as low positive (less than the cutoff GE/ml) or high positive (greater than the cutoff GE/mL). C(T) 30 for the E gene target using Cobas(®) SARS-CoV-2-FluA/B platform performed at TriCore Reference Laboratories, and this low positive cutoff value was used for two EUA authorizations. Using droplet digital PCR and methods described here, a value 49,447.72 was determined as the GE/ml equivalent for the low positive cutoff. The C(T) cutoff corresponding to 49447.72 GE/ml was determined across other platforms and laboratories. The methodology and statistical analysis described here can now be used for standardization of all comparators used for FDA submissions with a goal towards establishing uniform criteria for EUA authorization. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10659510 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-106595102023-11-20 Standardization and Comparison of Emergency Use Authorized COVID-19 Assays and Testing Laboratories. Rao, Anuradha Lin, Jessica Parsons, Richard Greenleaf, Morgan Westbrook, Adrianna Lai, Eric Bowers, Heather B. McClendon, Kaleb O’Sick, William Baugh, Tyler Sifford, Markayla Sullivan, Julie A. Lam, Wilbur A. Bassit, Leda medRxiv Article MOTIVATION: The motivation for this work was the need to establish a predefined cutoff based on genome copies per ml (GE/ml) rather than Ct, which can vary depending on the laboratory and assay used. A GE/ml-based threshold was necessary to define what constituted ‘low positives” for samples that were included in data sets submitted to the FDA for emergency use approval for SARS-CoV-2 antigen tests. SUMMARY: SARS-CoV-2, the causal agent of the global COVID-19 pandemic, made its appearance at the end of 2019 and is still circulating in the population. The pandemic led to an urgent need for fast, reliable, and widely available testing. After December 2020, the emergence of new variants of SARS-CoV-2 led to additional challenges since new and existing tests had to detect variants to the same extent as the original Wuhan strain. When an antigen-based test is submitted to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) consideration it is benchmarked against PCR comparator assays, which yield cycle threshold (C(T)) data as an indirect indicator of viral load – the lower the C(T), the higher the viral load of the sample and the higher the C(T), the lower the viral load. The FDA mandates that 10–20% of clinical samples used to evaluate the antigen test have to be low positive. Low positive, as defined by the FDA, are clinical samples in which the C(T) of the SARS-CoV-2 target gene is within 3 C(T) of the mean C(T) value of the approved comparator test’s Limit of Detection (LOD). While all comparator tests are PCR-based, the results from different PCR assays used are not uniform. Results vary depending on assay platform, target gene, LOD and laboratory methodology. The emergence and dominance of the Omicron variant further challenged this approach as the fraction of low positive clinical samples dramatically increased as compared to earlier SARS-CoV-2 variants. This led to 20–40% of clinical samples having high C(T) values and therefore assays vying for an EUA were failing to achieve the 80% Percent Positive Agreement (PPA) threshold required. Here we describe the methods and statistical analyses used to establish a predefined cutoff, based on genome copies per ml (GE/ml) to classify samples as low positive (less than the cutoff GE/ml) or high positive (greater than the cutoff GE/mL). C(T) 30 for the E gene target using Cobas(®) SARS-CoV-2-FluA/B platform performed at TriCore Reference Laboratories, and this low positive cutoff value was used for two EUA authorizations. Using droplet digital PCR and methods described here, a value 49,447.72 was determined as the GE/ml equivalent for the low positive cutoff. The C(T) cutoff corresponding to 49447.72 GE/ml was determined across other platforms and laboratories. The methodology and statistical analysis described here can now be used for standardization of all comparators used for FDA submissions with a goal towards establishing uniform criteria for EUA authorization. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory 2023-11-08 /pmc/articles/PMC10659510/ /pubmed/37986832 http://dx.doi.org/10.1101/2023.11.08.23297633 Text en https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/) , which allows reusers to copy and distribute the material in any medium or format in unadapted form only, and only so long as attribution is given to the creator. The license allows for commercial use. |
spellingShingle | Article Rao, Anuradha Lin, Jessica Parsons, Richard Greenleaf, Morgan Westbrook, Adrianna Lai, Eric Bowers, Heather B. McClendon, Kaleb O’Sick, William Baugh, Tyler Sifford, Markayla Sullivan, Julie A. Lam, Wilbur A. Bassit, Leda Standardization and Comparison of Emergency Use Authorized COVID-19 Assays and Testing Laboratories. |
title | Standardization and Comparison of Emergency Use Authorized COVID-19 Assays and Testing Laboratories. |
title_full | Standardization and Comparison of Emergency Use Authorized COVID-19 Assays and Testing Laboratories. |
title_fullStr | Standardization and Comparison of Emergency Use Authorized COVID-19 Assays and Testing Laboratories. |
title_full_unstemmed | Standardization and Comparison of Emergency Use Authorized COVID-19 Assays and Testing Laboratories. |
title_short | Standardization and Comparison of Emergency Use Authorized COVID-19 Assays and Testing Laboratories. |
title_sort | standardization and comparison of emergency use authorized covid-19 assays and testing laboratories. |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10659510/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37986832 http://dx.doi.org/10.1101/2023.11.08.23297633 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT raoanuradha standardizationandcomparisonofemergencyuseauthorizedcovid19assaysandtestinglaboratories AT linjessica standardizationandcomparisonofemergencyuseauthorizedcovid19assaysandtestinglaboratories AT parsonsrichard standardizationandcomparisonofemergencyuseauthorizedcovid19assaysandtestinglaboratories AT greenleafmorgan standardizationandcomparisonofemergencyuseauthorizedcovid19assaysandtestinglaboratories AT westbrookadrianna standardizationandcomparisonofemergencyuseauthorizedcovid19assaysandtestinglaboratories AT laieric standardizationandcomparisonofemergencyuseauthorizedcovid19assaysandtestinglaboratories AT bowersheatherb standardizationandcomparisonofemergencyuseauthorizedcovid19assaysandtestinglaboratories AT mcclendonkaleb standardizationandcomparisonofemergencyuseauthorizedcovid19assaysandtestinglaboratories AT osickwilliam standardizationandcomparisonofemergencyuseauthorizedcovid19assaysandtestinglaboratories AT baughtyler standardizationandcomparisonofemergencyuseauthorizedcovid19assaysandtestinglaboratories AT siffordmarkayla standardizationandcomparisonofemergencyuseauthorizedcovid19assaysandtestinglaboratories AT sullivanjuliea standardizationandcomparisonofemergencyuseauthorizedcovid19assaysandtestinglaboratories AT lamwilbura standardizationandcomparisonofemergencyuseauthorizedcovid19assaysandtestinglaboratories AT bassitleda standardizationandcomparisonofemergencyuseauthorizedcovid19assaysandtestinglaboratories |