Cargando…

Utility of Stool PCR for the Diagnosis of COVID-19: Comparison of Two Commercial Platforms

The ability to detect SARS-CoV-2 in the upper respiratory tract ceases after 2 to 3 weeks post-symptom-onset in most patients. In contrast, SARS-CoV-2 can be detected in the stool of some patients for greater than 4 weeks, suggesting that stool may hold utility as an additional source for diagnosis....

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Szymczak, Wendy A., Goldstein, D. Yitzchak, Orner, Erika P., Fecher, Roger A., Yokoda, Raquel T., Skalina, Karin A., Narlieva, Momka, Gendlina, Inessa, Fox, Amy S.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: American Society for Microbiology 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7448643/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32611796
http://dx.doi.org/10.1128/JCM.01369-20
_version_ 1783574523884339200
author Szymczak, Wendy A.
Goldstein, D. Yitzchak
Orner, Erika P.
Fecher, Roger A.
Yokoda, Raquel T.
Skalina, Karin A.
Narlieva, Momka
Gendlina, Inessa
Fox, Amy S.
author_facet Szymczak, Wendy A.
Goldstein, D. Yitzchak
Orner, Erika P.
Fecher, Roger A.
Yokoda, Raquel T.
Skalina, Karin A.
Narlieva, Momka
Gendlina, Inessa
Fox, Amy S.
author_sort Szymczak, Wendy A.
collection PubMed
description The ability to detect SARS-CoV-2 in the upper respiratory tract ceases after 2 to 3 weeks post-symptom-onset in most patients. In contrast, SARS-CoV-2 can be detected in the stool of some patients for greater than 4 weeks, suggesting that stool may hold utility as an additional source for diagnosis. We validated the Cepheid Xpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2 and Hologic Panther Fusion real-time RT-PCR assays for detection of viral RNA in stool specimens and compared performance. We utilized remnant stool specimens (n = 79) from 77 patients with gastrointestinal symptoms. Forty-eight patients had PCR-confirmed COVID-19, and 29 either were nasopharyngeal/oropharyngeal PCR negative or presented for reasons unrelated to COVID-19 and were not tested. Positive percent agreement between the Cepheid and Hologic assays was 93% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 81.1% to 98.2%), and negative percent agreement was 96% (95% CI: 89% to 0.99%). Four discrepant specimens (Cepheid positive only, n = 2; Hologic positive only, n = 2) exhibited average cycle threshold (C(T)) values of >37 for the targets detected. Of the 48 patients with PCR-confirmed COVID-19, 23 were positive by both assays (47.9%). For the negative patient group, 2/29 were positive by both assays (6.9%). The two stool PCR-positive, nasopharyngeal/oropharyngeal PCR-negative patients were SARS-CoV-2 IgG positive. Our results demonstrate acceptable agreement between two commercially available molecular assays and support the use of stool PCR to confirm diagnosis when SARS-CoV-2 is undetectable in the upper respiratory tract.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7448643
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher American Society for Microbiology
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-74486432020-09-09 Utility of Stool PCR for the Diagnosis of COVID-19: Comparison of Two Commercial Platforms Szymczak, Wendy A. Goldstein, D. Yitzchak Orner, Erika P. Fecher, Roger A. Yokoda, Raquel T. Skalina, Karin A. Narlieva, Momka Gendlina, Inessa Fox, Amy S. J Clin Microbiol Virology The ability to detect SARS-CoV-2 in the upper respiratory tract ceases after 2 to 3 weeks post-symptom-onset in most patients. In contrast, SARS-CoV-2 can be detected in the stool of some patients for greater than 4 weeks, suggesting that stool may hold utility as an additional source for diagnosis. We validated the Cepheid Xpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2 and Hologic Panther Fusion real-time RT-PCR assays for detection of viral RNA in stool specimens and compared performance. We utilized remnant stool specimens (n = 79) from 77 patients with gastrointestinal symptoms. Forty-eight patients had PCR-confirmed COVID-19, and 29 either were nasopharyngeal/oropharyngeal PCR negative or presented for reasons unrelated to COVID-19 and were not tested. Positive percent agreement between the Cepheid and Hologic assays was 93% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 81.1% to 98.2%), and negative percent agreement was 96% (95% CI: 89% to 0.99%). Four discrepant specimens (Cepheid positive only, n = 2; Hologic positive only, n = 2) exhibited average cycle threshold (C(T)) values of >37 for the targets detected. Of the 48 patients with PCR-confirmed COVID-19, 23 were positive by both assays (47.9%). For the negative patient group, 2/29 were positive by both assays (6.9%). The two stool PCR-positive, nasopharyngeal/oropharyngeal PCR-negative patients were SARS-CoV-2 IgG positive. Our results demonstrate acceptable agreement between two commercially available molecular assays and support the use of stool PCR to confirm diagnosis when SARS-CoV-2 is undetectable in the upper respiratory tract. American Society for Microbiology 2020-08-24 /pmc/articles/PMC7448643/ /pubmed/32611796 http://dx.doi.org/10.1128/JCM.01369-20 Text en Copyright © 2020 American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved (https://doi.org/10.1128/ASMCopyrightv2) . https://doi.org/10.1128/ASMCopyrightv2 This article is made available via the PMC Open Access Subset for unrestricted noncommercial re-use and secondary analysis in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for the duration of the World Health Organization (WHO) declaration of COVID-19 as a global pandemic.
spellingShingle Virology
Szymczak, Wendy A.
Goldstein, D. Yitzchak
Orner, Erika P.
Fecher, Roger A.
Yokoda, Raquel T.
Skalina, Karin A.
Narlieva, Momka
Gendlina, Inessa
Fox, Amy S.
Utility of Stool PCR for the Diagnosis of COVID-19: Comparison of Two Commercial Platforms
title Utility of Stool PCR for the Diagnosis of COVID-19: Comparison of Two Commercial Platforms
title_full Utility of Stool PCR for the Diagnosis of COVID-19: Comparison of Two Commercial Platforms
title_fullStr Utility of Stool PCR for the Diagnosis of COVID-19: Comparison of Two Commercial Platforms
title_full_unstemmed Utility of Stool PCR for the Diagnosis of COVID-19: Comparison of Two Commercial Platforms
title_short Utility of Stool PCR for the Diagnosis of COVID-19: Comparison of Two Commercial Platforms
title_sort utility of stool pcr for the diagnosis of covid-19: comparison of two commercial platforms
topic Virology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7448643/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32611796
http://dx.doi.org/10.1128/JCM.01369-20
work_keys_str_mv AT szymczakwendya utilityofstoolpcrforthediagnosisofcovid19comparisonoftwocommercialplatforms
AT goldsteindyitzchak utilityofstoolpcrforthediagnosisofcovid19comparisonoftwocommercialplatforms
AT ornererikap utilityofstoolpcrforthediagnosisofcovid19comparisonoftwocommercialplatforms
AT fecherrogera utilityofstoolpcrforthediagnosisofcovid19comparisonoftwocommercialplatforms
AT yokodaraquelt utilityofstoolpcrforthediagnosisofcovid19comparisonoftwocommercialplatforms
AT skalinakarina utilityofstoolpcrforthediagnosisofcovid19comparisonoftwocommercialplatforms
AT narlievamomka utilityofstoolpcrforthediagnosisofcovid19comparisonoftwocommercialplatforms
AT gendlinainessa utilityofstoolpcrforthediagnosisofcovid19comparisonoftwocommercialplatforms
AT foxamys utilityofstoolpcrforthediagnosisofcovid19comparisonoftwocommercialplatforms