Evaluation of an automated CRISPR-based diagnostic tool for rapid detection of COVID-19

The performance of an automated commercial CRISPR/Cas based technology was evaluated and compared with routine RT-PCR testing to diagnose COVID-19. Suspected and discharged COVID-19 cases were included and tested with CRISPR-based SARS-CoV-2 test and RT-PCR assay using throat swab and sputum specime...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Xu, Jun, Ma, Yuanyuan, Song, Zhigang, Sun, Wei, Liu, Yi, Shu, Chang, Hua, Hua, Yang, Ming, Liang, Qi
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier 2023
Materias:
Research Article
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9868009/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36712915
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e13190
Descripción
Sumario:The performance of an automated commercial CRISPR/Cas based technology was evaluated and compared with routine RT-PCR testing to diagnose COVID-19. Suspected and discharged COVID-19 cases were included and tested with CRISPR-based SARS-CoV-2 test and RT-PCR assay using throat swab and sputum specimens. The diagnostic yield was calculated and compared using the McNemar test. A total of 437 patients were included for analysis, including COVID-19 (n = 171), discharged cases (n = 155), and others (n = 111). For the diagnosis of COVID-19, the CRISPR-SARS-CoV-2 test had a sensitivity and specificity of 98.2% (168/171) and 100.0% (266/266), respectively; the RT-PCR test had a sensitivity and specificity of 100.0% (171/171) and 100.0% (266/266), respectively. No significant difference was found in the sensitivity of CRISPR-SARS-CoV-2 and RT-PCR. In conclusion, the CRISPR-SARS-CoV-2 test had a comparable performance with RT-PCR and showed several advantages, such as short assay time, low cost, and no requirement for expensive equipment.

Ejemplares similares