Cargando…

Reproducibility and sensitivity of 36 methods to quantify the SARS-CoV-2 genetic signal in raw wastewater: findings from an interlaboratory methods evaluation in the U.S.

In response to COVID-19, the international water community rapidly developed methods to quantify the SARS-CoV-2 genetic signal in untreated wastewater. Wastewater surveillance using such methods has the potential to complement clinical testing in assessing community health. This interlaboratory asse...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Pecson, Brian M., Darby, Emily, Haas, Charles N., Amha, Yamrot M., Bartolo, Mitchel, Danielson, Richard, Dearborn, Yeggie, Di Giovanni, George, Ferguson, Christobel, Fevig, Stephanie, Gaddis, Erica, Gray, Donald, Lukasik, George, Mull, Bonnie, Olivas, Liana, Olivieri, Adam, Qu, Yan
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8129921/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34017594
http://dx.doi.org/10.1039/d0ew00946f
_version_ 1783694403406135296
author Pecson, Brian M.
Darby, Emily
Haas, Charles N.
Amha, Yamrot M.
Bartolo, Mitchel
Danielson, Richard
Dearborn, Yeggie
Di Giovanni, George
Ferguson, Christobel
Fevig, Stephanie
Gaddis, Erica
Gray, Donald
Lukasik, George
Mull, Bonnie
Olivas, Liana
Olivieri, Adam
Qu, Yan
author_facet Pecson, Brian M.
Darby, Emily
Haas, Charles N.
Amha, Yamrot M.
Bartolo, Mitchel
Danielson, Richard
Dearborn, Yeggie
Di Giovanni, George
Ferguson, Christobel
Fevig, Stephanie
Gaddis, Erica
Gray, Donald
Lukasik, George
Mull, Bonnie
Olivas, Liana
Olivieri, Adam
Qu, Yan
author_sort Pecson, Brian M.
collection PubMed
description In response to COVID-19, the international water community rapidly developed methods to quantify the SARS-CoV-2 genetic signal in untreated wastewater. Wastewater surveillance using such methods has the potential to complement clinical testing in assessing community health. This interlaboratory assessment evaluated the reproducibility and sensitivity of 36 standard operating procedures (SOPs), divided into eight method groups based on sample concentration approach and whether solids were removed. Two raw wastewater samples were collected in August 2020, amended with a matrix spike (betacoronavirus OC43), and distributed to 32 laboratories across the U.S. Replicate samples analyzed in accordance with the project’s quality assurance plan showed high reproducibility across the 36 SOPs: 80% of the recovery-corrected results fell within a band of ±1.15 log(10) genome copies per L with higher reproducibility observed within a single SOP (standard deviation of 0.13 log(10)). The inclusion of a solids removal step and the selection of a concentration method did not show a clear, systematic impact on the recovery-corrected results. Other methodological variations (e.g., pasteurization, primer set selection, and use of RT-qPCR or RT-dPCR platforms) generally resulted in small differences compared to other sources of variability. These findings suggest that a variety of methods are capable of producing reproducible results, though the same SOP or laboratory should be selected to track SARS-CoV-2 trends at a given facility. The methods showed a 7 log(10) range of recovery efficiency and limit of detection highlighting the importance of recovery correction and the need to consider method sensitivity when selecting methods for wastewater surveillance.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8129921
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-81299212022-01-20 Reproducibility and sensitivity of 36 methods to quantify the SARS-CoV-2 genetic signal in raw wastewater: findings from an interlaboratory methods evaluation in the U.S. Pecson, Brian M. Darby, Emily Haas, Charles N. Amha, Yamrot M. Bartolo, Mitchel Danielson, Richard Dearborn, Yeggie Di Giovanni, George Ferguson, Christobel Fevig, Stephanie Gaddis, Erica Gray, Donald Lukasik, George Mull, Bonnie Olivas, Liana Olivieri, Adam Qu, Yan Environ Sci (Camb) Article In response to COVID-19, the international water community rapidly developed methods to quantify the SARS-CoV-2 genetic signal in untreated wastewater. Wastewater surveillance using such methods has the potential to complement clinical testing in assessing community health. This interlaboratory assessment evaluated the reproducibility and sensitivity of 36 standard operating procedures (SOPs), divided into eight method groups based on sample concentration approach and whether solids were removed. Two raw wastewater samples were collected in August 2020, amended with a matrix spike (betacoronavirus OC43), and distributed to 32 laboratories across the U.S. Replicate samples analyzed in accordance with the project’s quality assurance plan showed high reproducibility across the 36 SOPs: 80% of the recovery-corrected results fell within a band of ±1.15 log(10) genome copies per L with higher reproducibility observed within a single SOP (standard deviation of 0.13 log(10)). The inclusion of a solids removal step and the selection of a concentration method did not show a clear, systematic impact on the recovery-corrected results. Other methodological variations (e.g., pasteurization, primer set selection, and use of RT-qPCR or RT-dPCR platforms) generally resulted in small differences compared to other sources of variability. These findings suggest that a variety of methods are capable of producing reproducible results, though the same SOP or laboratory should be selected to track SARS-CoV-2 trends at a given facility. The methods showed a 7 log(10) range of recovery efficiency and limit of detection highlighting the importance of recovery correction and the need to consider method sensitivity when selecting methods for wastewater surveillance. 2021-01-20 /pmc/articles/PMC8129921/ /pubmed/34017594 http://dx.doi.org/10.1039/d0ew00946f Text en https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/This article is licensed under a CreativeCommonsAttribution-NonCommercial3.0UnportedLicence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) .
spellingShingle Article
Pecson, Brian M.
Darby, Emily
Haas, Charles N.
Amha, Yamrot M.
Bartolo, Mitchel
Danielson, Richard
Dearborn, Yeggie
Di Giovanni, George
Ferguson, Christobel
Fevig, Stephanie
Gaddis, Erica
Gray, Donald
Lukasik, George
Mull, Bonnie
Olivas, Liana
Olivieri, Adam
Qu, Yan
Reproducibility and sensitivity of 36 methods to quantify the SARS-CoV-2 genetic signal in raw wastewater: findings from an interlaboratory methods evaluation in the U.S.
title Reproducibility and sensitivity of 36 methods to quantify the SARS-CoV-2 genetic signal in raw wastewater: findings from an interlaboratory methods evaluation in the U.S.
title_full Reproducibility and sensitivity of 36 methods to quantify the SARS-CoV-2 genetic signal in raw wastewater: findings from an interlaboratory methods evaluation in the U.S.
title_fullStr Reproducibility and sensitivity of 36 methods to quantify the SARS-CoV-2 genetic signal in raw wastewater: findings from an interlaboratory methods evaluation in the U.S.
title_full_unstemmed Reproducibility and sensitivity of 36 methods to quantify the SARS-CoV-2 genetic signal in raw wastewater: findings from an interlaboratory methods evaluation in the U.S.
title_short Reproducibility and sensitivity of 36 methods to quantify the SARS-CoV-2 genetic signal in raw wastewater: findings from an interlaboratory methods evaluation in the U.S.
title_sort reproducibility and sensitivity of 36 methods to quantify the sars-cov-2 genetic signal in raw wastewater: findings from an interlaboratory methods evaluation in the u.s.
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8129921/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34017594
http://dx.doi.org/10.1039/d0ew00946f
work_keys_str_mv AT pecsonbrianm reproducibilityandsensitivityof36methodstoquantifythesarscov2geneticsignalinrawwastewaterfindingsfromaninterlaboratorymethodsevaluationintheus
AT darbyemily reproducibilityandsensitivityof36methodstoquantifythesarscov2geneticsignalinrawwastewaterfindingsfromaninterlaboratorymethodsevaluationintheus
AT haascharlesn reproducibilityandsensitivityof36methodstoquantifythesarscov2geneticsignalinrawwastewaterfindingsfromaninterlaboratorymethodsevaluationintheus
AT amhayamrotm reproducibilityandsensitivityof36methodstoquantifythesarscov2geneticsignalinrawwastewaterfindingsfromaninterlaboratorymethodsevaluationintheus
AT bartolomitchel reproducibilityandsensitivityof36methodstoquantifythesarscov2geneticsignalinrawwastewaterfindingsfromaninterlaboratorymethodsevaluationintheus
AT danielsonrichard reproducibilityandsensitivityof36methodstoquantifythesarscov2geneticsignalinrawwastewaterfindingsfromaninterlaboratorymethodsevaluationintheus
AT dearbornyeggie reproducibilityandsensitivityof36methodstoquantifythesarscov2geneticsignalinrawwastewaterfindingsfromaninterlaboratorymethodsevaluationintheus
AT digiovannigeorge reproducibilityandsensitivityof36methodstoquantifythesarscov2geneticsignalinrawwastewaterfindingsfromaninterlaboratorymethodsevaluationintheus
AT fergusonchristobel reproducibilityandsensitivityof36methodstoquantifythesarscov2geneticsignalinrawwastewaterfindingsfromaninterlaboratorymethodsevaluationintheus
AT fevigstephanie reproducibilityandsensitivityof36methodstoquantifythesarscov2geneticsignalinrawwastewaterfindingsfromaninterlaboratorymethodsevaluationintheus
AT gaddiserica reproducibilityandsensitivityof36methodstoquantifythesarscov2geneticsignalinrawwastewaterfindingsfromaninterlaboratorymethodsevaluationintheus
AT graydonald reproducibilityandsensitivityof36methodstoquantifythesarscov2geneticsignalinrawwastewaterfindingsfromaninterlaboratorymethodsevaluationintheus
AT lukasikgeorge reproducibilityandsensitivityof36methodstoquantifythesarscov2geneticsignalinrawwastewaterfindingsfromaninterlaboratorymethodsevaluationintheus
AT mullbonnie reproducibilityandsensitivityof36methodstoquantifythesarscov2geneticsignalinrawwastewaterfindingsfromaninterlaboratorymethodsevaluationintheus
AT olivasliana reproducibilityandsensitivityof36methodstoquantifythesarscov2geneticsignalinrawwastewaterfindingsfromaninterlaboratorymethodsevaluationintheus
AT olivieriadam reproducibilityandsensitivityof36methodstoquantifythesarscov2geneticsignalinrawwastewaterfindingsfromaninterlaboratorymethodsevaluationintheus
AT quyan reproducibilityandsensitivityof36methodstoquantifythesarscov2geneticsignalinrawwastewaterfindingsfromaninterlaboratorymethodsevaluationintheus
AT reproducibilityandsensitivityof36methodstoquantifythesarscov2geneticsignalinrawwastewaterfindingsfromaninterlaboratorymethodsevaluationintheus