Abstract
Background: SARS-CoV-2 is a newly emerged coronavirus, causing the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak in December, 2019. As drugs and vaccines of COVID-19 remain in development, accurate virus detection plays a crucial role in the current public health crisis. Quantitative real-time reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR) kits have been reliably used for detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA since the beginning of the COVID-19 outbreak, whereas isothermal nucleic acid amplification-based point-of-care automated kits have also been considered as a simpler and rapid alternative. However, as these kits have only been developed and applied clinically within a short timeframe, their clinical performance has not been adequately evaluated to date. We describe a comparative study between a newly developed cross-priming isothermal amplification (CPA) kit (Kit A) and five RT-qPCR kits (Kits B–F) to evaluate their sensitivity, specificity, predictive values and accuracy.
Methods: Fifty-two clinical samples were used including throat swabs (n=30), nasal swabs (n=7), nasopharyngeal swabs (n=7) and sputum specimens (n=8), comprising confirmed (n=26) and negative cases (n=26). SARS-CoV-2 detection was simultaneously performed on each sample using six nucleic acid amplification kits. The sensitivity, specificity, positive/negative predictive values (PPV/NPV) and the accuracy for each kit were assessed using clinical manifestation and molecular diagnoses as the reference standard. Reproducibility for RT-qPCR kits was evaluated in triplicate by three different operators using a SARS-CoV-2 RNA-positive sample. On the basis of the six kits’ evaluation results, CPA kit (Kit A) and two RT-qPCR Kits (Kit B and F) were applied to the SARS-CoV-2 detection in close-contacts of COVID-19 patients.
Results: For Kit A, the sensitivity, specificity, PPV/NPV and accuracy were 100%. Among the five RT-qPCR kits, Kits B, C and F had good agreement with the clinical diagnostic reports (Kappa≥0.75); Kits D and E were less congruent (0.4≤Kappa<0.75). Differences between all kits were statistically significant (P<0.001). The reproducibility of RT-qPCR kits was determined using a coefficients of variation (CV) between 0.95% and 2.57%, indicating good reproducibility.
Conclusions: This is the first comparative study to evaluate CPA and RT-qPCR kits’ specificity and sensitivity for SARS-CoV-2 detection, and could serve as a reference for clinical laboratories, thus informing testing protocols amid the rapidly progressing COVID-19 pandemic.
Keywords: SARS-CoV-2; COVID-19; nucleic acid detection; real-time reverse transcriptase PCR (RT-qPCR); cross-priming isothermal amplification (CPA)
Direct RT-PCR amplification of SARS-CoV-2 from clinical samples using a concentrated viral lysis-amplification buffer prepared with IGEPAL-630
