Cargando…

Evaluation of conventional and point‐of‐care real‐time RT‐PCR tests for the detection of SARS‐CoV‐2 through a pooled testing strategy

BACKGROUND: The rapid identification and isolation of individuals infected with SARS‐CoV‐2 are fundamental countermeasures for the efficient control of the COVID‐19 pandemic, which has affected millions of people around the world. Real‐time RT‐PCR is one of the most commonly applied reference method...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Yang, Ji‐Rong, Kuo, Chuan‐Yi, Huang, Hsiang‐Yi, Yu, I‐Ling, Hsieh, Chih‐Tsun, Chen, Bao‐Shan, Liu, Ming‐Tsan
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/PMC9169176/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35535393
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jcla.24491
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: The rapid identification and isolation of individuals infected with SARS‐CoV‐2 are fundamental countermeasures for the efficient control of the COVID‐19 pandemic, which has affected millions of people around the world. Real‐time RT‐PCR is one of the most commonly applied reference methods for virus detection, and the use of pooled testing has been proposed as an effective way to increase the throughput of routine diagnostic tests. However, the clinical applicability of different types of real‐time RT‐PCR tests in a given group size remains inconclusive due to inconsistent regional disease prevalence and test demands. METHODS: In this study, the performance of one dual‐target conventional and two point‐of‐care real‐time RT‐PCR tests in a 5‐specimen pooled testing strategy for the detection of SARS‐COV‐2 was evaluated. RESULTS: We demonstrated the proof of concept that all of these real‐time RT‐PCR tests could feasibly detect SARS‐CoV‐2 from nasopharyngeal and oropharyngeal specimens that contain viral RNA loads in the range of 3.48 × 10(5) to 3.42 × 10(2) copies/ml through pooled testing in a group size of 5 with overall positive percent agreement (pooling vs. individual testing) ranging from 100% to 93.75%. Furthermore, the two POC real‐time RT‐PCR tests exhibited comparable sensitivity to that of the dual‐target conventional one when clinical specimens were tested individually. CONCLUSION: Our findings support the feasibility of using real‐time RT‐PCR tests developed as a variety of platforms in routine laboratory detection of suspected COVID‐19 cases through a pooled testing strategy that is beneficial to increasing the daily diagnostic capacity.