An Ultra-Rapid Real-Time RT-PCR Method Using the PCR1100 to Detect Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus-2

ƩS COVID-19 is a rapid high throughput and sensitive one-step quadruplex real-time RT-PCR assay

Real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), a standard method recommended for the diagnosis of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) requires 2-4 h to get the result. Although antigen test kit (ATK) is used for COVID-19 screening within 15-30 min, the drawback is its limited sensitivity. Hence, a rapid one-step quadruplex real-time RT-PCR assay: termed ƩS COVID-19 targeting ORF1ab, ORF3a, and N genes of SARS-CoV-2; and Avocado sunblotch viroid (ASBVd) as an internal control was developed. Based on strategies including designing high melting temperature primers with short amplicons, applying a fast ramp rate, minimizing hold time, and reducing the range between denaturation and annealing/extension temperatures; the assay could be accomplished within 25 min. The limit of detection of ORF1ab, ORF3a, and N genes were 1.835, 1.310, and 1 copy/reaction, respectively. Validation was performed in 205 combined nasopharyngeal and oropharyngeal swabs. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value were 92.8%, 100%, 100%, and 97.1%, respectively with 96.7% accuracy. Cohen's Kappa was 0.93. The newly developed rapid real-time RT-PCR assay was highly sensitive, specific, and fast, making it suitable for use as an alternative method to support laboratory diagnosis of COVID-19 in outpatient and emergency departments.

Rapid multiplex real-time PCR assay using a portable device for the detection of oral pathogens

Colonization by several oral pathogens and the onset of oral diseases, such as dental caries and periodontal diseases, are closely related. Therefore, the analysis of pathogens in oral specimens would be helpful for the risk assessment of oral diseases. We developed a rapid multiplex real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR) method using a portable device and newly designed probe/primer sets to detect the oral pathogens Streptococcus mutans, Porphyromonas gingivalis, Treponema denticola, and Tannerella forsythia. The theoretical minimum detectable cell numbers of S. mutans, P. gingivalis, T. denticola, and T. forsythia were 1, 1, 4, and 3, respectively. The multiplex real-time PCR system simultaneously detected the colonization of S. mutans and P. gingivalis in human saliva. These results suggest that the multiplex real-time PCR system may be useful for the risk assessment of oral diseases.

Rapid and sensitive on-site detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA from environmental surfaces using portable laboratory devices

IMPORTANCE

This study presents the development of a highly sensitive on-site method for detecting severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) RNA on various surfaces, including doorknobs and tables. Identifying SARS-CoV-2 RNA on these surfaces can be crucial in guiding decision-making for implementing non-pharmaceutical interventions, such as zoning strategies, improving ventilation, maintaining physical distancing, and promoting increased hand hygiene practices. Moreover, the on-site detection system can facilitate the swift initiation of mitigation responses in non-laboratory settings, including long-term care facilities and schools. The protocols established in this study offer a comprehensive approach for achieving both sensitivity and rapidity in on-site SARS-CoV-2 RNA detection. Furthermore, since the RT-qPCR assay serves as the gold standard for detecting viral RNAs, the developed protocol holds potential for application to other viruses, including enteroviruses and noroviruses.

Development of a Real-Time RT-PCR System Applicable for Rapid and Pen-Side Diagnosis of Foot-and-Mouth Disease Using a Portable Device, PicoGene® PCR1100

Foot-and-mouth disease (FMD) is a highly contagious viral vesicular disease, causing devastating losses to the livestock industry. A diagnostic method that enables quick decisions is required to control the disease, especially in FMD-free countries. Although conventional real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) is a highly sensitive method widely used for the diagnosis of FMD, a time lag caused by the transport of samples to a laboratory may allow the spread of FMD. Here, we evaluated a real-time RT-PCR system using a portable PicoGene PCR1100 device for FMD diagnosis. This system could detect the synthetic FMD viral RNA within 20min with high sensitivity compared with a conventional real-time RT-PCR. Furthermore, the Lysis Buffer S for crude nucleic extraction improved the viral RNA detection of this system in a homogenate of vesicular epithelium samples collected from FMD virus-infected animals. Furthermore, this system could detect the viral RNA in crude extracts prepared using the Lysis Buffer S from the vesicular epithelium samples homogenized using a Finger Masher tube, which allows easy homogenization without any equipment, with a high correlation compared to the standard method. Thus, the PicoGene device system can be utilized for the rapid and pen-side diagnosis of FMD. (199 words).

Evaluation of a real-time mobile PCR device (PCR 1100) for the detection of the rabies gene in field samples

BACKGROUND

The Philippines is ranked among the top countries with 200-300 annual deaths due to rabies. Most human rabies cases have been reported in remote areas, where dog surveillance is inadequate. Therefore, a strategy to effectively improve surveillance in remote areas will increase the number of detections. Detecting pathogens using portable real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) has the potential to be accepted in these areas. Thus, we aimed to develop an assay to detect the rabies virus (RABV) genome by combining the robust primer system LN34 with the PicoGene PCR1100 portable rapid instrument targeting RABV RNA (PCR1100 assay).

METHODS

Procedures were optimised using an LN34 primer/probe set, KAPA3G Plant PCR Kit (KAPA Biosystems), FastGene Scriptase II (NIPPON Genetics), and an artificial positive control RNA.

RESULTS

Positive control RNA showed an analytical limit of detection of 10 copies/µL without false positivity, generating results in approximately 32 min. Compared to dFAT or RT-qPCR using field samples, the sensitivity and specificity of the PCR1100 assay were 100%, and even lower copy numbers (approximately 10 copies/µL) were detected.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrated that the developed assay can detect rabies RNA in field samples. Because dog-mediated rabies is endemic in remote areas, the rapidity, mobility, and practicality of the PCR1100 assay as well as the high sensitivity of the LN34 system make it an ideal tool for the confirmation of rabies in these areas.

SERS-based antibiotic susceptibility testing: Towards point-of-care clinical diagnosis

Emerging antibiotic resistant bacteria constitute one of the biggest threats to public health. Surface-enhanced Raman scattering (SERS) is highly promising for detecting such bacteria and for antibiotic susceptibility testing (AST). SERS is fast, non-destructive (can probe living cells) and it is technologically flexible (readily integrated with robotics and machine learning algorithms). However, in order to integrate into efficient point-of-care (PoC) devices and to effectively replace the current culture-based methods, it needs to overcome the challenges of reliability, cost and complexity. Recently, significant progress has been made with the emergence of both new questions and new promising directions of research and technological development. This article brings together insights from several representative SERS-based AST studies and approaches oriented towards clinical PoC biosensing. It aims to serve as a reference source that can guide progress towards PoC routines for identifying antibiotic resistant pathogens. In turn, such identification would help to trace the origin of sporadic infections, in order to prevent outbreaks and to design effective medical treatment and preventive procedures.

Rapid Detection of Attomolar SARS-CoV-2 Nucleic Acids in All-Dielectric Metasurface Biosensors

Worldwide infection due to SARS-CoV-2 revealed that short-time and extremely high-sensitivity detection of nucleic acids is a crucial technique for human beings. Polymerase chain reactions have been mainly used for the SARS-CoV-2 detection over the years. However, an advancement in quantification of the detection and shortening runtime is important for present and future use. Here, we report a rapid detection scheme that is a combination of nucleic acid amplification and a highly efficient fluorescence biosensor, that is, a metasurface biosensor composed of a pair of an all-dielectric metasurface and a microfluidic transparent chip. In the present scheme, we show a series of proof-of-concept experimental results that the metasurface biosensors detected amplicons originating from attomolar SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acids and that the amplification was implemented within 1 h. Furthermore, this detection capability substantially satisfies an official requirement of 100 RNA copies/140 μL, which is a criterion for the reliable infection tests.

Diagnostic Approaches For COVID-19: Lessons Learned and the Path Forward

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a transmitted respiratory disease caused by the infection of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Although humankind has experienced several outbreaks of infectious diseases, the COVID-19 pandemic has the highest rate of infection and has had high levels of social and economic repercussions. The current COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the limitations of existing virological tests, which have failed to be adopted at a rate to properly slow the rapid spread of SARS-CoV-2. Pandemic preparedness has developed as a focus of many governments around the world in the event of a future outbreak. Despite the largely widespread availability of vaccines, the importance of testing has not diminished to monitor the evolution of the virus and the resulting stages of the pandemic. Therefore, developing diagnostic technology that serves as a line of defense has become imperative. In particular, that test should satisfy three criteria to be widely adopted: simplicity, economic feasibility, and accessibility. At the heart of it all, it must enable early diagnosis in the course of infection to reduce spread. However, diagnostic manufacturers need guidance on the optimal characteristics of a virological test to ensure pandemic preparedness and to aid in the effective treatment of viral infections. Nanomaterials are a decisive element in developing COVID-19 diagnostic kits as well as a key contributor to enhance the performance of existing tests. Our objective is to develop a profile of the criteria that should be available in a platform as the target product. In this work, virus detection tests were evaluated from the perspective of the COVID-19 pandemic, and then we generalized the requirements to develop a target product profile for a platform for virus detection.

Detection of the ORF1 Gene Is an Indicator of the Possible Isolation of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2

In the ongoing coronavirus diseases 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), real-time RT-PCR based diagnostic assays have been used for the detection of infection, but the positive signal of real-time RT-PCR does not necessarily indicate the infectivity of the patient. Due to the unique replication system of the coronavirus, primer/probe sets targeted nucleocapsid (N) and spike (S) protein detect the abundantly synthesized subgenomic RNAs as well as the virus genome, possibly making the assay unsuitable for estimation of the infectivity of the specimen, although it has an advantage for the diagnostic tests. In this study, the primer/probe set targeting the open reading frame 1a (ORF1a) gene was developed to specifically detect viral genomic RNA. Then the relation between the ORF1a signal and infectivity of the clinical specimens was validated by virus isolation using VeroE6 cells, which constitutively express transmembrane protease, serine 2, (VeroE6/TMPRSS2). The analytical sensitivity of developed ORF1a set was similar to that of previously developed N and S sets. Nevertheless, in the assay of the clinical specimen, detection rate of the ORF1a gene was lower than that of the N and S genes. These data indicated that clinical specimens contain a significant amount of subgenomic RNAs. However, as expected, the isolation-succeeded specimen always showed an RT-PCR-positive signal for the ORF1a gene, suggesting ORF1a detection in combination with N and S sets could be a more rational indicator for the possible infectivity of the clinical specimens.

Antiviral Activity of CD437 Against Mumps Virus

Many efforts have been dedicated to the discovery of antiviral drug candidates against the mumps virus (MuV); however, no specific drug has yet been approved. The development of efficient screening methods is a key factor for the discovery of antiviral candidates. In this study, we evaluated a screening method using an Aequorea coerulescens green fluorescent protein-expressing MuV infectious molecular clone. The application of this system to screen for active compounds against MuV replication revealed that CD437, a retinoid acid receptor agonist, has anti-MuV activity. The point of antiviral action was a late step(s) in the MuV life cycle. The replication of other paramyxoviruses was also inhibited by CD437. The induction of retinoic acid-inducible gene (RIG)-I expression is a reported mechanism for the antiviral activity of retinoids, but our results indicated that CD437 did not stimulate RIG-I expression. Indeed, we observed antiviral activity despite the absence of RIG-I, suggesting that CD437 antiviral activity does not require RIG-I induction.

Rapid, point-of-care antigen and molecular-based tests for diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection

BACKGROUND

Accurate rapid diagnostic tests for SARS-CoV-2 infection could contribute to clinical and public health strategies to manage the COVID-19 pandemic. Point-of-care antigen and molecular tests to detect current infection could increase access to testing and early confirmation of cases, and expediate clinical and public health management decisions that may reduce transmission.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the diagnostic accuracy of point-of-care antigen and molecular-based tests for diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection. We consider accuracy separately in symptomatic and asymptomatic population groups.

SEARCH METHODS

Electronic searches of the Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register and the COVID-19 Living Evidence Database from the University of Bern (which includes daily updates from PubMed and Embase and preprints from medRxiv and bioRxiv) were undertaken on 30 Sept 2020. We checked repositories of COVID-19 publications and included independent evaluations from national reference laboratories, the Foundation for Innovative New Diagnostics and the Diagnostics Global Health website to 16 Nov 2020. We did not apply language restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included studies of people with either suspected SARS-CoV-2 infection, known SARS-CoV-2 infection or known absence of infection, or those who were being screened for infection. We included test accuracy studies of any design that evaluated commercially produced, rapid antigen or molecular tests suitable for a point-of-care setting (minimal equipment, sample preparation, and biosafety requirements, with results within two hours of sample collection). We included all reference standards that define the presence or absence of SARS-CoV-2 (including reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) tests and established diagnostic criteria).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Studies were screened independently in duplicate with disagreements resolved by discussion with a third author. Study characteristics were extracted by one author and checked by a second; extraction of study results and assessments of risk of bias and applicability (made using the QUADAS-2 tool) were undertaken independently in duplicate. We present sensitivity and specificity with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for each test and pooled data using the bivariate model separately for antigen and molecular-based tests. We tabulated results by test manufacturer and compliance with manufacturer instructions for use and according to symptom status.

MAIN RESULTS

Seventy-eight study cohorts were included (described in 64 study reports, including 20 pre-prints), reporting results for 24,087 samples (7,415 with confirmed SARS-CoV-2). Studies were mainly from Europe (n = 39) or North America (n = 20), and evaluated 16 antigen and five molecular assays. We considered risk of bias to be high in 29 (50%) studies because of participant selection; in 66 (85%) because of weaknesses in the reference standard for absence of infection; and in 29 (45%) for participant flow and timing. Studies of antigen tests were of a higher methodological quality compared to studies of molecular tests, particularly regarding the risk of bias for participant selection and the index test. Characteristics of participants in 35 (45%) studies differed from those in whom the test was intended to be used and the delivery of the index test in 39 (50%) studies differed from the way in which the test was intended to be used. Nearly all studies (97%) defined the presence or absence of SARS-CoV-2 based on a single RT-PCR result, and none included participants meeting case definitions for probable COVID-19. Antigen tests Forty-eight studies reported 58 evaluations of antigen tests. Estimates of sensitivity varied considerably between studies. There were differences between symptomatic (72.0%, 95% CI 63.7% to 79.0%; 37 evaluations; 15530 samples, 4410 cases) and asymptomatic participants (58.1%, 95% CI 40.2% to 74.1%; 12 evaluations; 1581 samples, 295 cases). Average sensitivity was higher in the first week after symptom onset (78.3%, 95% CI 71.1% to 84.1%; 26 evaluations; 5769 samples, 2320 cases) than in the second week of symptoms (51.0%, 95% CI 40.8% to 61.0%; 22 evaluations; 935 samples, 692 cases). Sensitivity was high in those with cycle threshold (Ct) values on PCR ≤25 (94.5%, 95% CI 91.0% to 96.7%; 36 evaluations; 2613 cases) compared to those with Ct values >25 (40.7%, 95% CI 31.8% to 50.3%; 36 evaluations; 2632 cases). Sensitivity varied between brands. Using data from instructions for use (IFU) compliant evaluations in symptomatic participants, summary sensitivities ranged from 34.1% (95% CI 29.7% to 38.8%; Coris Bioconcept) to 88.1% (95% CI 84.2% to 91.1%; SD Biosensor STANDARD Q). Average specificities were high in symptomatic and asymptomatic participants, and for most brands (overall summary specificity 99.6%, 95% CI 99.0% to 99.8%). At 5% prevalence using data for the most sensitive assays in symptomatic people (SD Biosensor STANDARD Q and Abbott Panbio), positive predictive values (PPVs) of 84% to 90% mean that between 1 in 10 and 1 in 6 positive results will be a false positive, and between 1 in 4 and 1 in 8 cases will be missed. At 0.5% prevalence applying the same tests in asymptomatic people would result in PPVs of 11% to 28% meaning that between 7 in 10 and 9 in 10 positive results will be false positives, and between 1 in 2 and 1 in 3 cases will be missed. No studies assessed the accuracy of repeated lateral flow testing or self-testing. Rapid molecular assays Thirty studies reported 33 evaluations of five different rapid molecular tests. Sensitivities varied according to test brand. Most of the data relate to the ID NOW and Xpert Xpress assays. Using data from evaluations following the manufacturer's instructions for use, the average sensitivity of ID NOW was 73.0% (95% CI 66.8% to 78.4%) and average specificity 99.7% (95% CI 98.7% to 99.9%; 4 evaluations; 812 samples, 222 cases). For Xpert Xpress, the average sensitivity was 100% (95% CI 88.1% to 100%) and average specificity 97.2% (95% CI 89.4% to 99.3%; 2 evaluations; 100 samples, 29 cases). Insufficient data were available to investigate the effect of symptom status or time after symptom onset.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Antigen tests vary in sensitivity. In people with signs and symptoms of COVID-19, sensitivities are highest in the first week of illness when viral loads are higher. The assays shown to meet appropriate criteria, such as WHO's priority target product profiles for COVID-19 diagnostics ('acceptable' sensitivity ≥ 80% and specificity ≥ 97%), can be considered as a replacement for laboratory-based RT-PCR when immediate decisions about patient care must be made, or where RT-PCR cannot be delivered in a timely manner. Positive predictive values suggest that confirmatory testing of those with positive results may be considered in low prevalence settings. Due to the variable sensitivity of antigen tests, people who test negative may still be infected. Evidence for testing in asymptomatic cohorts was limited. Test accuracy studies cannot adequately assess the ability of antigen tests to differentiate those who are infectious and require isolation from those who pose no risk, as there is no reference standard for infectiousness. A small number of molecular tests showed high accuracy and may be suitable alternatives to RT-PCR. However, further evaluations of the tests in settings as they are intended to be used are required to fully establish performance in practice. Several important studies in asymptomatic individuals have been reported since the close of our search and will be incorporated at the next update of this review. Comparative studies of antigen tests in their intended use settings and according to test operator (including self-testing) are required.

Performance evaluation of real-time RT-PCR assays for detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 developed by the National Institute of Infectious Diseases, Japan

Soon after the December 2019 outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 in Wuhan, China, a protocol for real-time RT-PCR assay detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) was established by the National Institute of Infectious Diseases (NIID) in Japan. The protocol used Charité's nucleocapsid (Sarbeco-N) and NIID's nucleocapsid (NIID-N2) assays. During the following months, SARS-CoV-2 spread causing a global pandemic, and a variety of SARS-CoV-2 sequences were registered to public databases, such as the Global Initiative on Sharing All Influenza Data (GISAID). In this study, we evaluated the newly developed S2 assay (NIID-S2) to replace the Sarbeco-N assay and the performance of NIID-N2 and NIID-S2 assays, referring mismatches in the primer/probe targeted region. We found the analytical sensitivity and specificity of the NIID-S2 set were comparable to the NIID-N2 assay, and the detection rate for clinical specimens was identical to that of the NIID-N2 assay. Furthermore, among available sequences (approximately 192,000), the NIID-N2 and NIID-S2 sets had 2.6% and 1.2% mismatched sequences, respectively, although most of these mismatches did not affect the amplification efficiency, with the exception of the 3' end of the NIID-N2 forward primer. These findings indicate that the previously developed NIID-N2 assay remains suitable for the detection SARS-CoV-2 with support of the newly developed NIID-S2 set.