Laboratory markers included in the Corona Score can identify false negative results on COVID-19 RT-PCR in the emergency room

After December 2019 outbreak in China, the novel Coronavirus infection (COVID-19) has very quickly overflowed worldwide. Infection causes a clinical syndrome encompassing a wide range of clinical features, from asymptomatic or oligosymptomatic course to acute respiratory distress and death. In a very recent work we preliminarily observed that several laboratory tests have been shown as characteristically altered in COVID-19. We aimed to use the Corona score, a validated point-based algorithm to predict the likelihood of COVID-19 infection in patients presenting at the Emergency rooms. This approach combines chest images-relative score and several laboratory parameters to classify emergency room patients. Corona score accuracy was satisfactory, increasing the detection of positive patients' rate.

Laboratory verification of an RT-PCR assay for SARS-CoV-2

BACKGROUND

Reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) is an extremely common clinical method for detecting pathogens, particularly for emerging infectious diseases such as the new coronavirus disease (COVID-19). Currently, detection of the RNA from the novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 is the gold standard for establishing a COVID-19 diagnosis. This study evaluates the characteristic performance of the analytical system in a clinical laboratory.

METHODS

A commercial SARS-CoV-2 RNA RT-PCR Kit used in a clinical laboratory is assessed based on ISO 15189 verification requirements. A multiple real-time RT-PCR assay for the RdRP, N, and E genes in SARS-CoV-2 is verified.

RESULTS

The analytical system exhibits good analytical sensitivity (1000 copies/mL) and specificity (100%); however, the values of 86.7% and 100% for analytical accuracy deserved attention, compared with two other types of methods. Overall, the kit is potentially useful for SARS-CoV-2 diagnostic testing and meets the verification requirements.

CONCLUSION

Compliance with international standards, such as ISO 15189, is valuable for clinical laboratories and for improving laboratory medicine quality and safety. Normalization is essential for obtaining reliable results from the SARS-CoV-2 RNA RT-PCR assay. This study aims to develop an improved SARS-CoV-2 verification framework compared with traditional molecular diagnostic methods, given the urgency of implementing new assays in clinical laboratories.

Detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA by multiplex RT-qPCR

The current quantitative reverse transcription PCR (RT-qPCR) assay recommended for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) testing in the United States requires analysis of 3 genomic targets per sample: 2 viral and 1 host. To simplify testing and reduce the volume of required reagents, we devised a multiplex RT-qPCR assay to detect SARS-CoV-2 in a single reaction. We used existing N1, N2, and RP primer and probe sets by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, but substituted fluorophores to allow multiplexing of the assay. The cycle threshold (Ct) values of our multiplex RT-qPCR were comparable to those obtained by the single assay adapted for research purposes. Low copy numbers (≥500 copies/reaction) of SARS-CoV-2 RNA were consistently detected by the multiplex RT-qPCR. Our novel multiplex RT-qPCR improves upon current single diagnostics by saving reagents, costs, time, and labor.

Nationwide External Quality Assessment of SARS-CoV-2 Molecular Testing, South Korea

External quality assessment (EQA) is essential for ensuring reliable test results, especially when laboratories are using assays authorized for emergency use for newly emerging pathogens. We developed an EQA panel to assess the quality of real-time reverse transcription PCR assays being used in South Korea to detect severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). With the participation of 23 public health organization laboratories and 95 nongovernmental laboratories involved in SARS-CoV-2 testing, we conducted qualitative and semiquantitative performance assessments by using pooled respiratory samples containing different viral loads of SARS-CoV-2 or human coronavirus OC43. A total of 110 (93.2%) laboratories reported correct results for all qualitative tests; 29 (24.6%) laboratories had >1 outliers according to cycle threshold values. Our EQA panel identified the potential weaknesses of currently available commercial reagent kits. The methodology we used can provide practical experience for those planning to conduct evaluations for testing of SARS-CoV-2 and other emerging pathogens in the future.

Diagnostic performances and thresholds: The key to harmonization in serological SARS-CoV-2 assays?

BACKGROUND

The evaluation of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) specific antibody (Ab) assay performances is of the utmost importance in establishing and monitoring virus spread in the community. In this study focusing on IgG antibodies, we compare reliability of three chemiluminescent (CLIA) and two enzyme linked immunosorbent (ELISA) assays.

METHODS

Sera from a total of 271 subjects, including 64 reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) confirmed SARS-CoV-2 patients were tested for specific Ab using Maglumi (Snibe), Liaison (Diasorin), iFlash (Yhlo), Euroimmun (Medizinische Labordiagnostika AG) and Wantai (Wantai Biological Pharmacy) assays. Diagnostic sensitivity and specificity, positive and negative likelihood ratios were evaluated using manufacturers' and optimized thresholds.

RESULTS

Optimized thresholds (Maglumi 2 kAU/L, Liaison 6.2 kAU/L and iFlash 15.0 kAU/L) allowed us to achieve a negative likelihood ratio and an accuracy of: 0.06 and 93.5% for Maglumi; 0.03 and 93.1% for Liaison; 0.03 and 91% for iFlash. Diagnostic sensitivities and specificities were above 93.8% and 85.9%, respectively for all CLIA assays. Overall agreement was 90.3% (Cohen's kappa = 0.805 and SE = 0.041) for CLIA, and 98.4% (Cohen's kappa = 0.962 and SE = 0.126) for ELISA.

CONCLUSIONS

The results obtained indicate that, for CLIA assays, it might be possible to define thresholds that improve the negative likelihood ratio. Thus, a negative test result enables the identification of subjects at risk of being infected, who should then be closely monitored over time with a view to preventing further viral spread. Redefined thresholds, in addition, improved the overall inter-assay agreement, paving the way to a better harmonization of serologic tests.

Direct RT-qPCR detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA from patient nasopharyngeal swabs without an RNA extraction step

The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic has created an unprecedented need for rapid diagnostic testing. The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends a standard assay that includes an RNA extraction step from a nasopharyngeal (NP) swab followed by reverse transcription-quantitative polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR) to detect the purified SARS-CoV-2 RNA. The current global shortage of RNA extraction kits has caused a severe bottleneck to COVID-19 testing. The goal of this study was to determine whether SARS-CoV-2 RNA could be detected from NP samples via a direct RT-qPCR assay that omits the RNA extraction step altogether. The direct RT-qPCR approach correctly identified 92% of a reference set of blinded NP samples (n = 155) demonstrated to be positive for SARS-CoV-2 RNA by traditional clinical diagnostic RT-qPCR that included an RNA extraction. Importantly, the direct method had sufficient sensitivity to reliably detect those patients with viral loads that correlate with the presence of infectious virus. Thus, this strategy has the potential to ease supply choke points to substantially expand COVID-19 testing and screening capacity and should be applicable throughout the world.

Massive and rapid COVID-19 testing is feasible by extraction-free SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), is commonly diagnosed by reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) to detect viral RNA in patient samples, but RNA extraction constitutes a major bottleneck in current testing. Methodological simplification could increase diagnostic availability and efficiency, benefitting patient care and infection control. Here, we describe methods circumventing RNA extraction in COVID-19 testing by performing RT-PCR directly on heat-inactivated or lysed samples. Our data, including benchmarking using 597 clinical patient samples and a standardised diagnostic system, demonstrate that direct RT-PCR is viable option to extraction-based tests. Using controlled amounts of active SARS-CoV-2, we confirm effectiveness of heat inactivation by plaque assay and evaluate various generic buffers as transport medium for direct RT-PCR. Significant savings in time and cost are achieved through RNA-extraction-free protocols that are directly compatible with established PCR-based testing pipelines. This could aid expansion of COVID-19 testing.

Rapid isothermal amplification and portable detection system for SARS-CoV-2

The COVID-19 pandemic provides an urgent example where a gap exists between availability of state-of-the-art diagnostics and current needs. As assay protocols and primer sequences become widely known, many laboratories perform diagnostic tests using methods such as RT-PCR or reverse transcription loop mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP). Here, we report an RT-LAMP isothermal assay for the detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) virus and demonstrate the assay on clinical samples using a simple and accessible point-of-care (POC) instrument. We characterized the assay by dipping swabs into synthetic nasal fluid spiked with the virus, moving the swab to viral transport medium (VTM), and sampling a volume of the VTM to perform the RT-LAMP assay without an RNA extraction kit. The assay has a limit of detection (LOD) of 50 RNA copies per μL in the VTM solution within 30 min. We further demonstrate our assay by detecting SARS-CoV-2 viruses from 20 clinical samples. Finally, we demonstrate a portable and real-time POC device to detect SARS-CoV-2 from VTM samples using an additively manufactured three-dimensional cartridge and a smartphone-based reader. The POC system was tested using 10 clinical samples, and was able to detect SARS-CoV-2 from these clinical samples by distinguishing positive samples from negative samples after 30 min. The POC tests are in complete agreement with RT-PCR controls. This work demonstrates an alternative pathway for SARS-CoV-2 diagnostics that does not require conventional laboratory infrastructure, in settings where diagnosis is required at the point of sample collection.

Types of Assays for SARS-CoV-2 Testing: A Review

Clinical laboratory testing routinely provides actionable results, which help direct patient care in the inpatient and outpatient settings. Since December 2019, a novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) has been causing disease (COVID-19 [coronavirus disease 2019]) in patients, beginning in China and now extending worldwide. In this context of a novel viral pandemic, clinical laboratories have developed multiple novel assays for SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis and for managing patients afflicted with this illness. These include molecular and serologic-based tests, some with point-of-care testing capabilities. Herein, we present an overview of the types of testing available for managing patients with COVID-19, as well as for screening of potential plasma donors who have recovered from COVID-19.

Evaluation of three immunochromatographic tests for rapid detection of antibodies against SARS-CoV-2

Lateral flow immunoassays (LFIA) for rapid detection of specific antibodies (IgM and IgG) against SARS-CoV-2 in different human specimens have been developed in response to the pandemic. The aim of this study is to evaluate three immunocromathographic assays (Sienna®, Wondfo® and Prometheus®) for detection of antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 in serum samples, considering RT-qPCR as a reference. A total of 145 serum samples from 145 patients with clinical suspicion of COVID-19 were collected: all of the samples were tested with Sienna®, 117 with Wondfo® and 89 with Prometheus®. The overall results of sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value obtained were as follows: 64.4%, 75%, 85.5% and 47.8% with Sienna®; 45.2%, 81.8%, 80.5% and 47.4% with Wondfo® and 75.5%, 12.5%, 51.4% and 29.4% with Prometheus®. The accuracy of the test for Sienna®, Wondfo® and Prometheus® was 67.6%, 59% and 47.2%, with a prevalence of COVID-19 of 69.7%, 62.4% and 55.1% respectively. Sensitivity of the three tests (Sienna®, Wondfo® and Prometheus® respectively) along the three different stages was 36.6%, 18.8% and 68.6% in the early stage (first week); 81.3%, 74.1% and 90.9% in the intermediate stage (second week) and 100%, 83.3% and 100% in the late stage (third week). The results demonstrate that even though Prometheus® presented a high sensitivity, the specificity was notably lower than the other two tests. Sienna® showed the greatest contrast between sensitivity and specificity, achieving the best accuracy, followed by Wondfo®. The sensitivity of the three ICT assays was higher in late stages of the disease.

Antibody tests for identification of current and past infection with SARS-CoV-2

BACKGROUND

The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) virus and resulting COVID-19 pandemic present important diagnostic challenges. Several diagnostic strategies are available to identify current infection, rule out infection, identify people in need of care escalation, or to test for past infection and immune response. Serology tests to detect the presence of antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 aim to identify previous SARS-CoV-2 infection, and may help to confirm the presence of current infection.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the diagnostic accuracy of antibody tests to determine if a person presenting in the community or in primary or secondary care has SARS-CoV-2 infection, or has previously had SARS-CoV-2 infection, and the accuracy of antibody tests for use in seroprevalence surveys.

SEARCH METHODS

We undertook electronic searches in the Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register and the COVID-19 Living Evidence Database from the University of Bern, which is updated daily with published articles from PubMed and Embase and with preprints from medRxiv and bioRxiv. In addition, we checked repositories of COVID-19 publications. We did not apply any language restrictions. We conducted searches for this review iteration up to 27 April 2020.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included test accuracy studies of any design that evaluated antibody tests (including enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays, chemiluminescence immunoassays, and lateral flow assays) in people suspected of current or previous SARS-CoV-2 infection, or where tests were used to screen for infection. We also included studies of people either known to have, or not to have SARS-CoV-2 infection. We included all reference standards to define the presence or absence of SARS-CoV-2 (including reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction tests (RT-PCR) and clinical diagnostic criteria).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We assessed possible bias and applicability of the studies using the QUADAS-2 tool. We extracted 2x2 contingency table data and present sensitivity and specificity for each antibody (or combination of antibodies) using paired forest plots. We pooled data using random-effects logistic regression where appropriate, stratifying by time since post-symptom onset. We tabulated available data by test manufacturer. We have presented uncertainty in estimates of sensitivity and specificity using 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

MAIN RESULTS

We included 57 publications reporting on a total of 54 study cohorts with 15,976 samples, of which 8526 were from cases of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Studies were conducted in Asia (n = 38), Europe (n = 15), and the USA and China (n = 1). We identified data from 25 commercial tests and numerous in-house assays, a small fraction of the 279 antibody assays listed by the Foundation for Innovative Diagnostics. More than half (n = 28) of the studies included were only available as preprints. We had concerns about risk of bias and applicability. Common issues were use of multi-group designs (n = 29), inclusion of only COVID-19 cases (n = 19), lack of blinding of the index test (n = 49) and reference standard (n = 29), differential verification (n = 22), and the lack of clarity about participant numbers, characteristics and study exclusions (n = 47). Most studies (n = 44) only included people hospitalised due to suspected or confirmed COVID-19 infection. There were no studies exclusively in asymptomatic participants. Two-thirds of the studies (n = 33) defined COVID-19 cases based on RT-PCR results alone, ignoring the potential for false-negative RT-PCR results. We observed evidence of selective publication of study findings through omission of the identity of tests (n = 5). We observed substantial heterogeneity in sensitivities of IgA, IgM and IgG antibodies, or combinations thereof, for results aggregated across different time periods post-symptom onset (range 0% to 100% for all target antibodies). We thus based the main results of the review on the 38 studies that stratified results by time since symptom onset. The numbers of individuals contributing data within each study each week are small and are usually not based on tracking the same groups of patients over time. Pooled results for IgG, IgM, IgA, total antibodies and IgG/IgM all showed low sensitivity during the first week since onset of symptoms (all less than 30.1%), rising in the second week and reaching their highest values in the third week. The combination of IgG/IgM had a sensitivity of 30.1% (95% CI 21.4 to 40.7) for 1 to 7 days, 72.2% (95% CI 63.5 to 79.5) for 8 to 14 days, 91.4% (95% CI 87.0 to 94.4) for 15 to 21 days. Estimates of accuracy beyond three weeks are based on smaller sample sizes and fewer studies. For 21 to 35 days, pooled sensitivities for IgG/IgM were 96.0% (95% CI 90.6 to 98.3). There are insufficient studies to estimate sensitivity of tests beyond 35 days post-symptom onset. Summary specificities (provided in 35 studies) exceeded 98% for all target antibodies with confidence intervals no more than 2 percentage points wide. False-positive results were more common where COVID-19 had been suspected and ruled out, but numbers were small and the difference was within the range expected by chance. Assuming a prevalence of 50%, a value considered possible in healthcare workers who have suffered respiratory symptoms, we would anticipate that 43 (28 to 65) would be missed and 7 (3 to 14) would be falsely positive in 1000 people undergoing IgG/IgM testing at days 15 to 21 post-symptom onset. At a prevalence of 20%, a likely value in surveys in high-risk settings, 17 (11 to 26) would be missed per 1000 people tested and 10 (5 to 22) would be falsely positive. At a lower prevalence of 5%, a likely value in national surveys, 4 (3 to 7) would be missed per 1000 tested, and 12 (6 to 27) would be falsely positive. Analyses showed small differences in sensitivity between assay type, but methodological concerns and sparse data prevent comparisons between test brands.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The sensitivity of antibody tests is too low in the first week since symptom onset to have a primary role for the diagnosis of COVID-19, but they may still have a role complementing other testing in individuals presenting later, when RT-PCR tests are negative, or are not done. Antibody tests are likely to have a useful role for detecting previous SARS-CoV-2 infection if used 15 or more days after the onset of symptoms. However, the duration of antibody rises is currently unknown, and we found very little data beyond 35 days post-symptom onset. We are therefore uncertain about the utility of these tests for seroprevalence surveys for public health management purposes. Concerns about high risk of bias and applicability make it likely that the accuracy of tests when used in clinical care will be lower than reported in the included studies. Sensitivity has mainly been evaluated in hospitalised patients, so it is unclear whether the tests are able to detect lower antibody levels likely seen with milder and asymptomatic COVID-19 disease. The design, execution and reporting of studies of the accuracy of COVID-19 tests requires considerable improvement. Studies must report data on sensitivity disaggregated by time since onset of symptoms. COVID-19-positive cases who are RT-PCR-negative should be included as well as those confirmed RT-PCR, in accordance with the World Health Organization (WHO) and China National Health Commission of the People's Republic of China (CDC) case definitions. We were only able to obtain data from a small proportion of available tests, and action is needed to ensure that all results of test evaluations are available in the public domain to prevent selective reporting. This is a fast-moving field and we plan ongoing updates of this living systematic review.

COVID-19 Serosurveillance May Facilitate Return-to-Work Decisions

Public health measures are needed to resolve the novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic, although a looming economic fallout merits close attention. Early safe reintroduction of immune individuals into the workforce may be essential to protecting the economic welfare of communities. Reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction testing, our primary diagnostic tool to date, has sensitivity and timing concerns, owing to sampling/handling errors, as well as a complex virus-host interaction. Reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction assays do not establish immune status once the virus has been cleared. Targeted serosurveillance for the determination of individuals' potential for transmissibility, particularly if paired with direct pathogen testing, may aid in "cleared for business" decision-making.

Selection and validation of reference genes for normalisation of gene expression in ischaemic and toxicological studies in kidney disease

Normalisation to standard reference gene(s) is essential for quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR) to obtain reproducible and comparable results of a gene of interest (GOI) between subjects and under varying experimental conditions. There is limited evidence to support selection of the commonly used reference genes in rat ischaemic and toxicological kidney models. Employing these models, we determined the most stable reference genes by comparing 4 standard methods (NormFinder, qBase+, BestKeeper and comparative ΔCq) and developed a new 3-way linear mixed-effects model for evaluation of reference gene stability. This new technique utilises the intra-class correlation coefficient as the stability measure for multiple continuous and categorical covariates when determining the optimum normalisation factor. The model also determines confidence intervals for each candidate normalisation gene to facilitate selection and allow sample size calculation for designing experiments to identify reference genes. Of the 10 candidate reference genes tested, the geometric mean of polyadenylate-binding nuclear protein 1 (PABPN1) and beta-actin (ACTB) was the most stable reference combination. In contrast, commonly used ribosomal 18S and glyceraldehyde 3-phosphate dehydrogenase (GAPDH) were the most unstable. We compared the use of PABPN1×ACTB and 2 commonly used genes 18S and GAPDH on the expression of 4 genes of interest know to vary after renal injury and expressed by different kidney cell types (KIM-1, HIF1α, TGFβ1 and PECAM1). The less stable reference genes gave varying patterns of GOI expression in contrast to the use of the least unstable reference PABPN1×ACTB combination; this improved detection of differences in gene expression between experimental groups. Reduced within-group variation of the now more accurately normalised GOI may allow for reduced experimental group size particularly for comparison between various models. This objective selection of stable reference genes increased the reliability of comparisons within and between experimental groups.

Delayed Laboratory Response to COVID-19 Caused by Molecular Diagnostic Contamination

The emergence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) created an exceptional situation in which numerous laboratories in Europe simultaneously implemented SARS-CoV-2 diagnostics. These laboratories reported in February 2020 that commercial primer and probe batches for SARS-CoV-2 detection were contaminated with synthetic control material, causing delays of regional testing roll-out in various countries.

SARS-CoV2: Diagnostic tests available to the clinician

On December 2019, a new coronavirus disease (COVID-19) emerged in China and spread worldwide, causing acute severe respiratory syndrome. Due to the increased transmission rate of the virus, it became of great importance the early diagnosis of the disease. The coronavirus pandemic led to the development of numerous tests in order to mass screening population for active viral load and for the identification of antibodies for epidemiological purposes. This review summarizes the different diagnostic tests available to the clinicians for the diagnosis and follow up of the SARS COV-2 infections.

Laboratory Tests for COVID-19: A Review of Peer-Reviewed Publications and Implications for Clinical Use

Diagnostic tests for the coronavirus infection 2019 (COVID-19) are critical for prompt diagnosis, treatment and isolation to break the cycle of transmission. A positive real-time reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), in conjunction with clinical and epidemiologic data, is the current standard for diagnosis, but several challenges still exist. Serological assays help to understand epidemiology better and to evaluate vaccine responses but they are unreliable for diagnosis in the acute phase of illness or assuming protective immunity. Serology is gaining attention, mainly because of convalescent plasma gaining importance as treatment for clinically worsening COVID-19 patients. We provide a narrative review of peer-reviewed research studies on RT-PCR, serology and antigen immune-assays for COVID-19, briefly describe their lab methods and discuss their limitations for clinical practice.

Selection of reference genes for normalization of RT-qPCR data in gene expression studies in Anthonomus eugenii Cano (Coleoptera: Curculionidae)

The pepper weevil, Anthonomus eugenii Cano (Coleoptera: Curculionidae), is the main insect pest of peppers (Capsicum spp.) throughout the southern U.S. and a potential target for novel control methods that may require gene expression analyses. Careful selection of adequate reference genes to normalize RT-qPCR data is an important prerequisite for gene expression studies since the expression stability of reference genes can be affected by the experimental conditions leading to biased or erroneous results. The lack of studies on validation of reference genes for RT-qPCR analysis in A. eugenii limits the investigation of gene expression, therefore it is needed a systematic selection of suitable reference genes for data normalization. In the present study, three programs (BestKeeper, geNorm and NormFinder) were used to analyze the expression stability of candidate reference genes (β-ACT, ArgK, EF1-α, GAPDH, RPL12, RPS23, α-TUB, 18S and 28S) in A. eugenii under different experimental conditions. Our results revealed that the most stably expressed reference genes in A. eugenii varied according to the experimental condition evaluated: developmental stages (EF1-α, 18S and RPL12), sex (RPS23 and RPL12), low temperature (GAPDH and α-TUB), high temperature (α-TUB and RPS23), all temperatures (α-TUB and GAPDH), starvation (RPL12 and α-TUB), and dsRNA exposure (α-TUB and RPL12). Our study provides for the first time valuable information on appropriate reference genes that can be used in the analysis of gene expression by RT-qPCR in biological experiments involving A. eugenii.

Identification and validation of reference genes for RT-qPCR normalization in wheat meiosis

Meiosis is a specialized type of cell division occurring in sexually reproducing organisms to generate haploid cells known as gametes. In flowering plants, male gametes are produced in anthers, being encased in pollen grains. Understanding the genetic regulation of meiosis key events such as chromosome recognition and pairing, synapsis and recombination, is needed to manipulate chromosome associations for breeding purposes, particularly in important cereal crops like wheat. Reverse transcription-quantitative PCR (RT-qPCR) is widely used to analyse gene expression and to validate the results obtained by other transcriptomic analyses, like RNA-seq. Selection and validation of appropriate reference genes for RT-qPCR normalization is essential to obtain reproducible and accurate expression data. In this work, twelve candidate reference genes were evaluated using the mainstream algorithms geNorm, Normfinder, BestKeeper and ΔCt, then ranked from most to least suitable for normalization with RefFinder. Different sets of reference genes were recommended to normalize gene expression data in anther meiosis of bread and durum wheat, their corresponding genotypes in the absence of the Ph1 locus and for comparative studies among wheat genotypes. Comparisons between meiotic (anthers) and somatic (leaves and roots) wheat tissues were also carried out. To the best of our knowledge, our study provides the first comprehensive list of reference genes for robust RT-qPCR normalization to study differentially expressed genes during male meiosis in wheat in a breeding framework.

Development of RT-qPCR and semi-nested RT-PCR assays for molecular diagnosis of hantavirus pulmonary syndrome

Hantavirus Pulmonary Syndrome is an, often fatal, emerging zoonotic disease in the Americas caused by hantaviruses (family: Hantaviridae). In Brazil, hantavirus routine diagnosis is based on serology (IgM-ELISA) while RT-PCR is often used to confirm acute infection. A Semi-nested RT-PCR and an internally controlled RT-qPCR assays were developed for detection and quantification of four hantaviruses strains circulating in the Brazilian Amazon: Anajatuba (ANAJV) and Castelo dos Sonhos (CASV) strains of Andes virus (ANDV) species; and Rio Mamoré (RIOMV) and Laguna Negra (LNV) strains of LNV species. A consensus region in the N gene of these hantaviruses was used to design the primer sets and a hydrolysis probe. In vitro transcribed RNA was diluted in standards with known concentration. MS2 bacteriophage RNA was detected together with hantavirus RNA as an exogenous control in a duplex reaction. RT-qPCR efficiency was around 100% and the limit of detection was 0.9 copies/μL of RNA for RT-qPCR and 10 copies/μL of RNA for Semi-nested RT-PCR. There was no amplification of either negative samples or samples positive to other pathogens. To assess the protocol for clinical sensitivity, specificity and general accuracy values, both assays were used to test two groups of samples: one comprising patients with disease (n = 50) and other containing samples from healthy individuals (n = 50), according to IgM-ELISA results. A third group of samples (n = 27) infected with other pathogens were tested for specificity analysis. RT-qPCR was more sensitive than semi-nested RT-PCR, being able to detect three samples undetected by conventional RT-PCR. RT-qPCR clinical sensitivity, specificity and general accuracy values were 92.5%, 100% and 97.63%, respectively. Thus, the assays developed in this study were able to detect the four Brazilian Amazon hantaviruses with good specificity and sensitivity, and may become powerful tools in diagnostic, surveillance and research applications of these and possibly other hantaviruses.

Hantavirus Pulmonary Syndrome (HPS) is a serious and often fatal disease caused by viruses known as hantaviruses. These viruses are harbored by wild rodents and people can become infected through contact with infected-rodents droppings, urine or saliva. After an incubation time of 1–8 weeks, patients usually present flu-like symptoms such as fever, fatigue and muscle aches, although some patients may also present headaches, dizziness, chills, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, and abdominal pain. It is only 4–10 days after initial symptoms, however, that the severe stage of disease takes place. Symptoms include coughing, shortness of breath and eventually the lungs fill with fluid which can lead to shock and death. As such, HPS should be diagnosed quickly as any delay may have great impact on patient recovery. However, given the unspecific nature of early symptoms, clinical diagnosis of HPS is difficult and laboratory assays are needed to confirm hantavirus infection as soon as possible, helping physicians to choose the most adequate treatment. In this study, we developed new laboratory assays that can help detect the virus in infected patients in early stages of disease. In addition, we showed these assays have a good performance in discriminating HPS from other similar diseases by testing not only several samples collected from both HPS patients and healthy individuals but also samples infected with other pathogens. Our results show that these assays may become important tools for rapid, sensitive and specific diagnosis of HPS.

Selection of optimal reference genes for qRT-PCR analysis of shoot development and graviresponse in prostrate and erect chrysanthemums

The prostrate cultivars of ground-cover chrysanthemum have been used in landscape gardening due to their small stature, large crown width and strong branching ability. qRT-PCR is a rapid and powerful tool for gene expression analysis, while its accuracy highly depends on the stability of reference genes. The paucity of authentic reference genes presents a major hurdle in understanding the genetic regulators of prostrate architecture. Therefore, in order to reveal the regulatory mechanism of prostrate growth of chrysanthemum stems, here, stable reference genes were selected for expression analysis of key genes involved in shoot development and graviresponse. Based on transcriptome data, eleven reference genes with relatively stable expression were identified as the candidate reference genes. After the comprehensive analysis of the stability of these reference genes with four programs (geNorm, NormFinder, BestKeeper and RefFinder), we found that TIP41 was the most stable reference gene in all of the samples. SAND was determined as a superior reference gene in different genotypes and during the process of shoot development. The optimal reference gene for gravitropic response was PP2A-1. In addition, the expression patterns of LA1 and PIN1 further verified the reliability of the screened reference genes. These results can provide more accurate and reliable qRT-PCR normalization for future studies on the expression patterns of genes regulating plant architecture of chrysanthemums.

Development of a multiplex real-time RT-PCR assay for simultaneous detection and differentiation of influenza A, B, C, and D viruses

Influenza is a common and contagious respiratory disease caused by influenza A, B, C, and D viruses (IAV, IBV, ICV, and IDV). A multiplex real-time RT-PCR assay was developed for simultaneous detection of IAV, IBV, ICV, and IDV. The assay was designed to target unique sequences in the matrix gene of IBV and ICV, the RNA polymerase subunit PB1 of IDV, and combined with USDA and CDC IAV assays, both target the matrix gene. The host 18S rRNA gene was included as an internal control. In silico analyses indicated high strain coverages: 97.9% for IBV, 99.5% for ICV, and 100% for IDV. Transcribed RNA, viral isolates and clinical samples were used for validation. The assay specifically detected target viruses without cross-reactivity, nor detection of other common pathogens. The limit of detection was approximately 30 copies for each viral RNA template, which was equivalent to a threshold cycle value of ~37.

Identification and validation of reference genes for real-time quantitative RT-PCR analysis in jute

BACKGROUND

With the availability of genome sequences, gene expression analysis of jute has drawn considerable attention for understanding the regulatory mechanisms of fiber development and improving fiber quality. Gene expression profiles of a target gene can provide valuable clues towards the understanding of its biological function. Reverse transcription quantitative real-time PCR (qRT-PCR) is the best method for targeted gene expression analysis due to its sensitivity and reproducibility. However, calculating relative expression requires reference genes, which must be stable across various biological conditions. For this purposes, 11 prospective genes namely, 28S RNA, ACT7, CYP, EF1A, EF2, ETIF3E, GAPDH, PP2Ac, PTB, UBC2 and UBI1 were evaluated for their potential use as reference genes in jute.

RESULTS

The expression stabilities of eleven prospective genes were analyzed in various jute plant tissues, such as the root, stick, bark, leaf, flower, seed and fiber, as well as under abiotic (waterlogged, drought and salinity) and biotic stress (infestation with Macrophomina phaseolina) conditions with different time points. All 11 genes were variably expressed in different tissues and stress conditions. To find suitable reference genes in different sample sets, a comprehensive approach based on four statistical algorithms such as GeNorm, BestKeeper, NormFinder the ΔCt was used. The PP2Ac and EF2 genes were the most stably expressed across the different tissues. ACT7 and UBC2 were suitable reference genes under drought stress, and CYP and PP2Ac were the most appropriate after inoculation with Macrophomina phaseolina. Under salinity stress, PP2Ac and UBC2 were the best genes, and ACT7 and PP2Ac were the most suitable under waterlogged conditions.

CONCLUSION

Expression stability of reference genes from jute varied in different tissues and selected experimental conditions. Our results provide a valuable resource for the accurate normalization of gene expression experiments in fiber research for important bast fiber crops.