Cargando…

Evaluation of six different rapid methods for nucleic acid detection of SARS‐COV‐2 virus

In the current coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) pandemic there is a mass screening of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2) happening around the world due to the extensive spread of the infections. There is a high demand for rapid diagnostic tests to expedite the identifica...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Mahmoud, Sally A., Ganesan, Subhashini, Ibrahim, Esra, Thakre, Bhagyashree, Teddy, Juliet G., Raheja, Preety, Zaher, Walid A.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8242416/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34002401
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jmv.27090
_version_ 1783715623148191744
author Mahmoud, Sally A.
Ganesan, Subhashini
Ibrahim, Esra
Thakre, Bhagyashree
Teddy, Juliet G.
Raheja, Preety
Zaher, Walid A.
author_facet Mahmoud, Sally A.
Ganesan, Subhashini
Ibrahim, Esra
Thakre, Bhagyashree
Teddy, Juliet G.
Raheja, Preety
Zaher, Walid A.
author_sort Mahmoud, Sally A.
collection PubMed
description In the current coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) pandemic there is a mass screening of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2) happening around the world due to the extensive spread of the infections. There is a high demand for rapid diagnostic tests to expedite the identification of cases and to facilitate early isolation and control spread. Hence this study evaluates six different rapid nucleic acid detection assays that are commercially available for SARS‐CoV‐2 virus detection. Nasopharyngeal samples were collected from 4981 participants and were tested for the SARS‐CoV‐2 virus by the gold standard real‐time reverse‐transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT‐PCR) method and with one of these six rapid methods of detection. Evaluation of the rapid nucleic acid detection assays was done by comparing the results of these rapid methods with the gold standard RT‐qPCR results for SARS‐COV‐2 detection. AQ‐TOP had the highest sensitivity (98%) and a strong kappa value of 0.943 followed by Genechecker and Abbot ID NOW. The POCKIT (ii RT‐PCR) assay had the highest test accuracy of 99.29% followed by Genechecker and Cobas Liat. Atila iAMP showed the highest percentage of invalid reports (35.5%) followed by AQ‐TOP with 6% and POCKIT with 3.7% of invalid reports. Genechecker system, Abbott ID NOW, and Cobas Liat were found to have the best performance and agreement when compared with the standard RT‐PCR for COVID‐19 detection. With further research, these rapid tests have the potential to be employed in large‐scale screening of COVID‐19.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8242416
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-82424162021-07-01 Evaluation of six different rapid methods for nucleic acid detection of SARS‐COV‐2 virus Mahmoud, Sally A. Ganesan, Subhashini Ibrahim, Esra Thakre, Bhagyashree Teddy, Juliet G. Raheja, Preety Zaher, Walid A. J Med Virol Research Articles In the current coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) pandemic there is a mass screening of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2) happening around the world due to the extensive spread of the infections. There is a high demand for rapid diagnostic tests to expedite the identification of cases and to facilitate early isolation and control spread. Hence this study evaluates six different rapid nucleic acid detection assays that are commercially available for SARS‐CoV‐2 virus detection. Nasopharyngeal samples were collected from 4981 participants and were tested for the SARS‐CoV‐2 virus by the gold standard real‐time reverse‐transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT‐PCR) method and with one of these six rapid methods of detection. Evaluation of the rapid nucleic acid detection assays was done by comparing the results of these rapid methods with the gold standard RT‐qPCR results for SARS‐COV‐2 detection. AQ‐TOP had the highest sensitivity (98%) and a strong kappa value of 0.943 followed by Genechecker and Abbot ID NOW. The POCKIT (ii RT‐PCR) assay had the highest test accuracy of 99.29% followed by Genechecker and Cobas Liat. Atila iAMP showed the highest percentage of invalid reports (35.5%) followed by AQ‐TOP with 6% and POCKIT with 3.7% of invalid reports. Genechecker system, Abbott ID NOW, and Cobas Liat were found to have the best performance and agreement when compared with the standard RT‐PCR for COVID‐19 detection. With further research, these rapid tests have the potential to be employed in large‐scale screening of COVID‐19. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2021-06-08 2021-09 /pmc/articles/PMC8242416/ /pubmed/34002401 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jmv.27090 Text en © 2021 G42 Healthcare. Journal of Medical Virology published by Wiley Periodicals LLC https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.
spellingShingle Research Articles
Mahmoud, Sally A.
Ganesan, Subhashini
Ibrahim, Esra
Thakre, Bhagyashree
Teddy, Juliet G.
Raheja, Preety
Zaher, Walid A.
Evaluation of six different rapid methods for nucleic acid detection of SARS‐COV‐2 virus
title Evaluation of six different rapid methods for nucleic acid detection of SARS‐COV‐2 virus
title_full Evaluation of six different rapid methods for nucleic acid detection of SARS‐COV‐2 virus
title_fullStr Evaluation of six different rapid methods for nucleic acid detection of SARS‐COV‐2 virus
title_full_unstemmed Evaluation of six different rapid methods for nucleic acid detection of SARS‐COV‐2 virus
title_short Evaluation of six different rapid methods for nucleic acid detection of SARS‐COV‐2 virus
title_sort evaluation of six different rapid methods for nucleic acid detection of sars‐cov‐2 virus
topic Research Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8242416/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34002401
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jmv.27090
work_keys_str_mv AT mahmoudsallya evaluationofsixdifferentrapidmethodsfornucleicaciddetectionofsarscov2virus
AT ganesansubhashini evaluationofsixdifferentrapidmethodsfornucleicaciddetectionofsarscov2virus
AT ibrahimesra evaluationofsixdifferentrapidmethodsfornucleicaciddetectionofsarscov2virus
AT thakrebhagyashree evaluationofsixdifferentrapidmethodsfornucleicaciddetectionofsarscov2virus
AT teddyjulietg evaluationofsixdifferentrapidmethodsfornucleicaciddetectionofsarscov2virus
AT rahejapreety evaluationofsixdifferentrapidmethodsfornucleicaciddetectionofsarscov2virus
AT zaherwalida evaluationofsixdifferentrapidmethodsfornucleicaciddetectionofsarscov2virus