Cargando…

Assessing severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infectivity by reverse‐transcription polymerase chain reaction: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

The cornerstone of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2) detection is reverse‐transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT‐PCR) of viral RNA. As a surrogate assay SARS‐CoV‐2 RNA detection does not necessarily imply infectivity. Only virus isolation in permissive cell culture sy...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Fomenko, Alexey, Weibel, Stephanie, Moezi, Helia, Menger, Kristina, Schmucker, Christine, Metzendorf, Maria‐Inti, Motschall, Edith, Falcone, Valeria, Huzly, Daniela, Panning, Marcus, Rücker, Gerta, Hengel, Hartmut
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9111068/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35366033
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/rmv.2342
_version_ 1784709232995598336
author Fomenko, Alexey
Weibel, Stephanie
Moezi, Helia
Menger, Kristina
Schmucker, Christine
Metzendorf, Maria‐Inti
Motschall, Edith
Falcone, Valeria
Huzly, Daniela
Panning, Marcus
Rücker, Gerta
Hengel, Hartmut
author_facet Fomenko, Alexey
Weibel, Stephanie
Moezi, Helia
Menger, Kristina
Schmucker, Christine
Metzendorf, Maria‐Inti
Motschall, Edith
Falcone, Valeria
Huzly, Daniela
Panning, Marcus
Rücker, Gerta
Hengel, Hartmut
author_sort Fomenko, Alexey
collection PubMed
description The cornerstone of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2) detection is reverse‐transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT‐PCR) of viral RNA. As a surrogate assay SARS‐CoV‐2 RNA detection does not necessarily imply infectivity. Only virus isolation in permissive cell culture systems can indicate infectivity. Here, we review the evidence on RT‐PCR performance in detecting infectious SARS‐CoV‐2. We searched for any studies that used RT‐PCR and cell culture to determine infectious SARS‐CoV‐2 in respiratory samples. We assessed (i) diagnostic accuracy of RT‐PCR compared to cell culture as reference test, (ii) performed meta‐analysis of positive predictive values (PPV) and (iii) determined the virus isolation probabilities depending on cycle threshold (Ct) or log(10) genome copies/ml using logistic regression. We included 55 studies. There is substantial statistical and clinical heterogeneity. Seven studies were included for diagnostic accuracy. Sensitivity ranged from 90% to 99% and specificity from 29% to 92%. In meta‐analysis, the PPVs varied across subgroups with different sampling times after symptom onset, with 1% (95% confidence interval [CI], 0%–7%) in sampling beyond 10 days and 27% (CI, 19%–36%) to 46% (CI, 33%–60%) in subgroups that also included earlier samples. Estimates of virus isolation probability varied between 6% (CI, 0%–100%) and 50% (CI, 0%–100%) at a Ct value of 30 and between 0% (CI, 0%–22%) and 63% (CI, 0%–100%) at 5 log(10) genome copies/ml. Evidence on RT‐PCR performance in detecting infectious SARS‐CoV‐2 in respiratory samples was limited. Major limitations were heterogeneity and poor reporting. RT‐PCR and cell culture protocols need further standardisation.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9111068
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-91110682022-05-17 Assessing severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infectivity by reverse‐transcription polymerase chain reaction: A systematic review and meta‐analysis Fomenko, Alexey Weibel, Stephanie Moezi, Helia Menger, Kristina Schmucker, Christine Metzendorf, Maria‐Inti Motschall, Edith Falcone, Valeria Huzly, Daniela Panning, Marcus Rücker, Gerta Hengel, Hartmut Rev Med Virol Reviews The cornerstone of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2) detection is reverse‐transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT‐PCR) of viral RNA. As a surrogate assay SARS‐CoV‐2 RNA detection does not necessarily imply infectivity. Only virus isolation in permissive cell culture systems can indicate infectivity. Here, we review the evidence on RT‐PCR performance in detecting infectious SARS‐CoV‐2. We searched for any studies that used RT‐PCR and cell culture to determine infectious SARS‐CoV‐2 in respiratory samples. We assessed (i) diagnostic accuracy of RT‐PCR compared to cell culture as reference test, (ii) performed meta‐analysis of positive predictive values (PPV) and (iii) determined the virus isolation probabilities depending on cycle threshold (Ct) or log(10) genome copies/ml using logistic regression. We included 55 studies. There is substantial statistical and clinical heterogeneity. Seven studies were included for diagnostic accuracy. Sensitivity ranged from 90% to 99% and specificity from 29% to 92%. In meta‐analysis, the PPVs varied across subgroups with different sampling times after symptom onset, with 1% (95% confidence interval [CI], 0%–7%) in sampling beyond 10 days and 27% (CI, 19%–36%) to 46% (CI, 33%–60%) in subgroups that also included earlier samples. Estimates of virus isolation probability varied between 6% (CI, 0%–100%) and 50% (CI, 0%–100%) at a Ct value of 30 and between 0% (CI, 0%–22%) and 63% (CI, 0%–100%) at 5 log(10) genome copies/ml. Evidence on RT‐PCR performance in detecting infectious SARS‐CoV‐2 in respiratory samples was limited. Major limitations were heterogeneity and poor reporting. RT‐PCR and cell culture protocols need further standardisation. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022-04-02 2022-09 /pmc/articles/PMC9111068/ /pubmed/35366033 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/rmv.2342 Text en © 2022 The Authors. Reviews in Medical Virology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. 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 Reviews
Fomenko, Alexey
Weibel, Stephanie
Moezi, Helia
Menger, Kristina
Schmucker, Christine
Metzendorf, Maria‐Inti
Motschall, Edith
Falcone, Valeria
Huzly, Daniela
Panning, Marcus
Rücker, Gerta
Hengel, Hartmut
Assessing severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infectivity by reverse‐transcription polymerase chain reaction: A systematic review and meta‐analysis
title Assessing severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infectivity by reverse‐transcription polymerase chain reaction: A systematic review and meta‐analysis
title_full Assessing severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infectivity by reverse‐transcription polymerase chain reaction: A systematic review and meta‐analysis
title_fullStr Assessing severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infectivity by reverse‐transcription polymerase chain reaction: A systematic review and meta‐analysis
title_full_unstemmed Assessing severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infectivity by reverse‐transcription polymerase chain reaction: A systematic review and meta‐analysis
title_short Assessing severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infectivity by reverse‐transcription polymerase chain reaction: A systematic review and meta‐analysis
title_sort assessing severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infectivity by reverse‐transcription polymerase chain reaction: a systematic review and meta‐analysis
topic Reviews
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9111068/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35366033
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/rmv.2342
work_keys_str_mv AT fomenkoalexey assessingsevereacuterespiratorysyndromecoronavirus2infectivitybyreversetranscriptionpolymerasechainreactionasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT weibelstephanie assessingsevereacuterespiratorysyndromecoronavirus2infectivitybyreversetranscriptionpolymerasechainreactionasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT moezihelia assessingsevereacuterespiratorysyndromecoronavirus2infectivitybyreversetranscriptionpolymerasechainreactionasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT mengerkristina assessingsevereacuterespiratorysyndromecoronavirus2infectivitybyreversetranscriptionpolymerasechainreactionasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT schmuckerchristine assessingsevereacuterespiratorysyndromecoronavirus2infectivitybyreversetranscriptionpolymerasechainreactionasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT metzendorfmariainti assessingsevereacuterespiratorysyndromecoronavirus2infectivitybyreversetranscriptionpolymerasechainreactionasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT motschalledith assessingsevereacuterespiratorysyndromecoronavirus2infectivitybyreversetranscriptionpolymerasechainreactionasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT falconevaleria assessingsevereacuterespiratorysyndromecoronavirus2infectivitybyreversetranscriptionpolymerasechainreactionasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT huzlydaniela assessingsevereacuterespiratorysyndromecoronavirus2infectivitybyreversetranscriptionpolymerasechainreactionasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT panningmarcus assessingsevereacuterespiratorysyndromecoronavirus2infectivitybyreversetranscriptionpolymerasechainreactionasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT ruckergerta assessingsevereacuterespiratorysyndromecoronavirus2infectivitybyreversetranscriptionpolymerasechainreactionasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT hengelhartmut assessingsevereacuterespiratorysyndromecoronavirus2infectivitybyreversetranscriptionpolymerasechainreactionasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis