Cargando…
Multisite Clinical Validation of Isothermal Amplification-Based SARS-CoV-2 Detection Assays Using Different Sampling Strategies
Isothermal amplification-based tests have been introduced as rapid, low-cost, and simple alternatives to real-time reverse transcriptase PCR (RT-PCR) tests for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) detection. The clinical performance of two isothermal amplification-based tests...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
American Society for Microbiology
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8528118/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34668736 http://dx.doi.org/10.1128/Spectrum.00846-21 |
_version_ | 1784586195494240256 |
---|---|
author | Desai, Kanan T. Alfaro, Karla Mendoza, Laura Faron, Matthew Mesich, Brian Maza, Mauricio Dominguez, Rhina Valenzuela, Adriana Acosta, Chyntia Díaz Martínez, Magaly Felix, Juan C. Masch, Rachel Smith, Jennifer S. Gabrilovich, Sofia Wu, Tracy Plump, Michael Novetsky, Akiva P. Einstein, Mark H. Douglas, Nataki C. Cremer, Miriam Wentzensen, Nicolas |
author_facet | Desai, Kanan T. Alfaro, Karla Mendoza, Laura Faron, Matthew Mesich, Brian Maza, Mauricio Dominguez, Rhina Valenzuela, Adriana Acosta, Chyntia Díaz Martínez, Magaly Felix, Juan C. Masch, Rachel Smith, Jennifer S. Gabrilovich, Sofia Wu, Tracy Plump, Michael Novetsky, Akiva P. Einstein, Mark H. Douglas, Nataki C. Cremer, Miriam Wentzensen, Nicolas |
author_sort | Desai, Kanan T. |
collection | PubMed |
description | Isothermal amplification-based tests have been introduced as rapid, low-cost, and simple alternatives to real-time reverse transcriptase PCR (RT-PCR) tests for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) detection. The clinical performance of two isothermal amplification-based tests (Atila Biosystems iAMP coronavirus disease of 2019 [COVID-19] detection test and OptiGene COVID-19 direct plus RT-loop-mediated isothermal amplification [LAMP] test) was compared with that of clinical RT-PCR assays using different sampling strategies. A total of 1,378 participants were tested across 4 study sites. Compared with standard of care RT-PCR testing, the overall sensitivity and specificity of the Atila iAMP test for detection of SARS-CoV-2 were 76.2% and 94.9%, respectively, and increased to 88.8% and 89.5%, respectively, after exclusion of an outlier study site. Sensitivity varied based on the anatomic site from which the sample was collected. Sensitivity for nasopharyngeal sampling was 65.4% (range across study sites, 52.8% to 79.8%), for midturbinate was 88.2%, for saliva was 55.1% (range across study sites, 42.9% to 77.8%), and for anterior nares was 66.7% (range across study sites, 63.6% to 76.5%). The specificity for these anatomic collection sites ranged from 96.7% to 100%. Sensitivity improved in symptomatic patients (overall, 82.7%) and those with a higher viral load (overall, 92.4% for cycle threshold [C(T)] of ≤25). Sensitivity and specificity of the OptiGene direct plus RT-LAMP test, which was conducted at a single study site, were 25.5% and 100%, respectively. The Atila iAMP COVID test with midturbinate sampling is a rapid, low-cost assay for detecting SARS-CoV-2, especially in symptomatic patients and those with a high viral load, and could be used to reduce the risk of SARS-CoV-2 transmission in clinical settings. Variation of performance between study sites highlights the need for site-specific clinical validation of these assays before clinical adoption. IMPORTANCE Numerous SARS-CoV-2 detection assays have been developed and introduced into the market under emergency use authorizations (EUAs). EUAs are granted primarily based on small studies of analytic sensitivity and specificity with limited clinical validations. A thorough clinical performance evaluation of SARS-CoV-2 assays is important to understand the strengths, limitations, and specific applications of these assays. In this first large-scale multicentric study, we evaluated the clinical performance and operational characteristics of two isothermal amplification-based SARS-CoV-2 tests, namely, (i) iAMP COVID-19 detection test (Atila BioSystems, USA) and (ii) COVID-19 direct plus RT-LAMP test (OptiGene Ltd., UK), compared with those of clinical RT-PCR tests using different sampling strategies (i.e., nasopharyngeal, self-sampled anterior nares, self-sampled midturbinate, and saliva). An important specific use for these isothermal amplification-based, rapid, low-cost, and easy-to-perform SARS-CoV-2 assays is to allow for a safer return to preventive clinical encounters, such as cancer screening, particularly in low- and middle-income countries that have low SARS-CoV-2 vaccination rates. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8528118 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | American Society for Microbiology |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-85281182021-11-08 Multisite Clinical Validation of Isothermal Amplification-Based SARS-CoV-2 Detection Assays Using Different Sampling Strategies Desai, Kanan T. Alfaro, Karla Mendoza, Laura Faron, Matthew Mesich, Brian Maza, Mauricio Dominguez, Rhina Valenzuela, Adriana Acosta, Chyntia Díaz Martínez, Magaly Felix, Juan C. Masch, Rachel Smith, Jennifer S. Gabrilovich, Sofia Wu, Tracy Plump, Michael Novetsky, Akiva P. Einstein, Mark H. Douglas, Nataki C. Cremer, Miriam Wentzensen, Nicolas Microbiol Spectr Research Article Isothermal amplification-based tests have been introduced as rapid, low-cost, and simple alternatives to real-time reverse transcriptase PCR (RT-PCR) tests for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) detection. The clinical performance of two isothermal amplification-based tests (Atila Biosystems iAMP coronavirus disease of 2019 [COVID-19] detection test and OptiGene COVID-19 direct plus RT-loop-mediated isothermal amplification [LAMP] test) was compared with that of clinical RT-PCR assays using different sampling strategies. A total of 1,378 participants were tested across 4 study sites. Compared with standard of care RT-PCR testing, the overall sensitivity and specificity of the Atila iAMP test for detection of SARS-CoV-2 were 76.2% and 94.9%, respectively, and increased to 88.8% and 89.5%, respectively, after exclusion of an outlier study site. Sensitivity varied based on the anatomic site from which the sample was collected. Sensitivity for nasopharyngeal sampling was 65.4% (range across study sites, 52.8% to 79.8%), for midturbinate was 88.2%, for saliva was 55.1% (range across study sites, 42.9% to 77.8%), and for anterior nares was 66.7% (range across study sites, 63.6% to 76.5%). The specificity for these anatomic collection sites ranged from 96.7% to 100%. Sensitivity improved in symptomatic patients (overall, 82.7%) and those with a higher viral load (overall, 92.4% for cycle threshold [C(T)] of ≤25). Sensitivity and specificity of the OptiGene direct plus RT-LAMP test, which was conducted at a single study site, were 25.5% and 100%, respectively. The Atila iAMP COVID test with midturbinate sampling is a rapid, low-cost assay for detecting SARS-CoV-2, especially in symptomatic patients and those with a high viral load, and could be used to reduce the risk of SARS-CoV-2 transmission in clinical settings. Variation of performance between study sites highlights the need for site-specific clinical validation of these assays before clinical adoption. IMPORTANCE Numerous SARS-CoV-2 detection assays have been developed and introduced into the market under emergency use authorizations (EUAs). EUAs are granted primarily based on small studies of analytic sensitivity and specificity with limited clinical validations. A thorough clinical performance evaluation of SARS-CoV-2 assays is important to understand the strengths, limitations, and specific applications of these assays. In this first large-scale multicentric study, we evaluated the clinical performance and operational characteristics of two isothermal amplification-based SARS-CoV-2 tests, namely, (i) iAMP COVID-19 detection test (Atila BioSystems, USA) and (ii) COVID-19 direct plus RT-LAMP test (OptiGene Ltd., UK), compared with those of clinical RT-PCR tests using different sampling strategies (i.e., nasopharyngeal, self-sampled anterior nares, self-sampled midturbinate, and saliva). An important specific use for these isothermal amplification-based, rapid, low-cost, and easy-to-perform SARS-CoV-2 assays is to allow for a safer return to preventive clinical encounters, such as cancer screening, particularly in low- and middle-income countries that have low SARS-CoV-2 vaccination rates. American Society for Microbiology 2021-10-20 /pmc/articles/PMC8528118/ /pubmed/34668736 http://dx.doi.org/10.1128/Spectrum.00846-21 Text en https://doi.org/10.1128/AuthorWarrantyLicense.v1This is a work of the U.S. Government and is not subject to copyright protection in the United States. Foreign copyrights may apply. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Desai, Kanan T. Alfaro, Karla Mendoza, Laura Faron, Matthew Mesich, Brian Maza, Mauricio Dominguez, Rhina Valenzuela, Adriana Acosta, Chyntia Díaz Martínez, Magaly Felix, Juan C. Masch, Rachel Smith, Jennifer S. Gabrilovich, Sofia Wu, Tracy Plump, Michael Novetsky, Akiva P. Einstein, Mark H. Douglas, Nataki C. Cremer, Miriam Wentzensen, Nicolas Multisite Clinical Validation of Isothermal Amplification-Based SARS-CoV-2 Detection Assays Using Different Sampling Strategies |
title | Multisite Clinical Validation of Isothermal Amplification-Based SARS-CoV-2 Detection Assays Using Different Sampling Strategies |
title_full | Multisite Clinical Validation of Isothermal Amplification-Based SARS-CoV-2 Detection Assays Using Different Sampling Strategies |
title_fullStr | Multisite Clinical Validation of Isothermal Amplification-Based SARS-CoV-2 Detection Assays Using Different Sampling Strategies |
title_full_unstemmed | Multisite Clinical Validation of Isothermal Amplification-Based SARS-CoV-2 Detection Assays Using Different Sampling Strategies |
title_short | Multisite Clinical Validation of Isothermal Amplification-Based SARS-CoV-2 Detection Assays Using Different Sampling Strategies |
title_sort | multisite clinical validation of isothermal amplification-based sars-cov-2 detection assays using different sampling strategies |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8528118/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34668736 http://dx.doi.org/10.1128/Spectrum.00846-21 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT desaikanant multisiteclinicalvalidationofisothermalamplificationbasedsarscov2detectionassaysusingdifferentsamplingstrategies AT alfarokarla multisiteclinicalvalidationofisothermalamplificationbasedsarscov2detectionassaysusingdifferentsamplingstrategies AT mendozalaura multisiteclinicalvalidationofisothermalamplificationbasedsarscov2detectionassaysusingdifferentsamplingstrategies AT faronmatthew multisiteclinicalvalidationofisothermalamplificationbasedsarscov2detectionassaysusingdifferentsamplingstrategies AT mesichbrian multisiteclinicalvalidationofisothermalamplificationbasedsarscov2detectionassaysusingdifferentsamplingstrategies AT mazamauricio multisiteclinicalvalidationofisothermalamplificationbasedsarscov2detectionassaysusingdifferentsamplingstrategies AT dominguezrhina multisiteclinicalvalidationofisothermalamplificationbasedsarscov2detectionassaysusingdifferentsamplingstrategies AT valenzuelaadriana multisiteclinicalvalidationofisothermalamplificationbasedsarscov2detectionassaysusingdifferentsamplingstrategies AT acostachyntiadiaz multisiteclinicalvalidationofisothermalamplificationbasedsarscov2detectionassaysusingdifferentsamplingstrategies AT martinezmagaly multisiteclinicalvalidationofisothermalamplificationbasedsarscov2detectionassaysusingdifferentsamplingstrategies AT felixjuanc multisiteclinicalvalidationofisothermalamplificationbasedsarscov2detectionassaysusingdifferentsamplingstrategies AT maschrachel multisiteclinicalvalidationofisothermalamplificationbasedsarscov2detectionassaysusingdifferentsamplingstrategies AT smithjennifers multisiteclinicalvalidationofisothermalamplificationbasedsarscov2detectionassaysusingdifferentsamplingstrategies AT gabrilovichsofia multisiteclinicalvalidationofisothermalamplificationbasedsarscov2detectionassaysusingdifferentsamplingstrategies AT wutracy multisiteclinicalvalidationofisothermalamplificationbasedsarscov2detectionassaysusingdifferentsamplingstrategies AT plumpmichael multisiteclinicalvalidationofisothermalamplificationbasedsarscov2detectionassaysusingdifferentsamplingstrategies AT novetskyakivap multisiteclinicalvalidationofisothermalamplificationbasedsarscov2detectionassaysusingdifferentsamplingstrategies AT einsteinmarkh multisiteclinicalvalidationofisothermalamplificationbasedsarscov2detectionassaysusingdifferentsamplingstrategies AT douglasnatakic multisiteclinicalvalidationofisothermalamplificationbasedsarscov2detectionassaysusingdifferentsamplingstrategies AT cremermiriam multisiteclinicalvalidationofisothermalamplificationbasedsarscov2detectionassaysusingdifferentsamplingstrategies AT wentzensennicolas multisiteclinicalvalidationofisothermalamplificationbasedsarscov2detectionassaysusingdifferentsamplingstrategies |