Comparison of SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR on a high-throughput molecular diagnostic platform and the cobas SARS-CoV-2 test for the diagnostic of COVID-19 on various clinical samples.

Uložené v:
Podrobná bibliografia
Názov: Comparison of SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR on a high-throughput molecular diagnostic platform and the cobas SARS-CoV-2 test for the diagnostic of COVID-19 on various clinical samples.
Autori: Opota, O., Brouillet, R., Greub, G., Jaton, K.
Rok vydania: 2025
Zbierka: Université de Lausanne (UNIL): Serval - Serveur académique lausannois
Predmety: Betacoronavirus/isolation & purification, COVID-19, Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis, Coronavirus Infections/virology, High-Throughput Nucleotide Sequencing/methods, Humans, Molecular Diagnostic Techniques/instrumentation, Molecular Diagnostic Techniques/methods, Nasopharynx/virology, Pandemics, Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis, Viral/virology, Reverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction/methods, SARS-CoV-2, RT-PCR, molecular diagnostic, anal swab, anorectal swab, bronchial aspirate, bronchoalveolar lavage, cobas 6800, nasopharyngeal swab
Popis: In order to cope with the rapid spread of the COVID-19 pandemic, we introduced on our in-house high-throughput molecular diagnostic platform (MDx Platform) a real-time reverse transcriptase PCR (RT-PCR) to detect the SARS-CoV-2 from any clinical specimens. The aim of this study was to compare the RT-PCR results obtain with the MDx Platform and the commercial assay cobas SARS-CoV-2 (Roche) on nasopharyngeal swab and other clinical specimens including sputum, bronchial aspirate, bronchoalveolar lavage and anal swabs. Samples received in our laboratory from patients suspected of COVID-19 (n = 262) were tested in parallel with our MDx platform SARS-CoV-2 PCR and with the cobas SARS-CoV-2 test. The overall agreement between the two tests for all samples tested was 99.24% (260/262), which corresponded to agreements of 100% (178/178) on nasopharyngeal swabs, 95.45% (42/44) on lower respiratory tract specimen with discordant resultS obtained for very high cycle threshold (Ct) value and 100% (40/40) on anorectal swabs. The Ct values for nasopharyngeal swabs displayed an excellent correlation (R2 > 96%) between both tests. The high agreements between the cobas SARS-CoV-2 test and the MDx platform supports the use of both methods for the diagnostic of COVID-19 on various clinical samples. Very few discrepant results may occur at very low viral load.
Druh dokumentu: article in journal/newspaper
Popis súboru: application/pdf
Jazyk: English
ISSN: 2049-632X
33030200
Relation: Pathogens and Disease; https://iris.unil.ch/handle/iris/118053; serval:BIB_50F61B3E6CFD; 000593394900006
DOI: 10.1093/femspd/ftaa061
Dostupnosť: https://iris.unil.ch/handle/iris/118053
https://doi.org/10.1093/femspd/ftaa061
Prístupové číslo: edsbas.1F8C42F0
Databáza: BASE
Popis
Abstrakt:In order to cope with the rapid spread of the COVID-19 pandemic, we introduced on our in-house high-throughput molecular diagnostic platform (MDx Platform) a real-time reverse transcriptase PCR (RT-PCR) to detect the SARS-CoV-2 from any clinical specimens. The aim of this study was to compare the RT-PCR results obtain with the MDx Platform and the commercial assay cobas SARS-CoV-2 (Roche) on nasopharyngeal swab and other clinical specimens including sputum, bronchial aspirate, bronchoalveolar lavage and anal swabs. Samples received in our laboratory from patients suspected of COVID-19 (n = 262) were tested in parallel with our MDx platform SARS-CoV-2 PCR and with the cobas SARS-CoV-2 test. The overall agreement between the two tests for all samples tested was 99.24% (260/262), which corresponded to agreements of 100% (178/178) on nasopharyngeal swabs, 95.45% (42/44) on lower respiratory tract specimen with discordant resultS obtained for very high cycle threshold (Ct) value and 100% (40/40) on anorectal swabs. The Ct values for nasopharyngeal swabs displayed an excellent correlation (R2 > 96%) between both tests. The high agreements between the cobas SARS-CoV-2 test and the MDx platform supports the use of both methods for the diagnostic of COVID-19 on various clinical samples. Very few discrepant results may occur at very low viral load.
ISSN:2049632X
33030200
DOI:10.1093/femspd/ftaa061