Validation of a Lysis Buffer Containing 4 M Guanidinium Thiocyanate (GITC)/ Triton X-100 for Extraction of SARS-CoV-2 RNA for COVID-19 Testing: Comparison of Formulated Lysis Buffers Containing 4 to 6 M GITC, Roche External Lysis Buffer and Qiagen RTL Lysis Buffer

  1. Martina F. Scallan
  2. Catherine Dempsey
  3. John MacSharry
  4. Isabelle O’Callaghan
  5. Paula M. O’Connor
  6. Conor P. Horgan
  7. Edel Durack
  8. Paul D. Cotter
  9. Sarah Hudson
  10. Humphrey A. Moynihan
  11. Brigid Lucey

Reviewed by

Read the full article

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in increased need for diagnostic testing using reverse transcriptase real-time PCR (RT-PCR). An exponential increase in demand has resulted in a shortage of numerous reagents in particular those associated with the lysis buffer required to extract the viral RNA. Herein, we describe a rapid collective effort by hospital laboratory scientists, academic researchers and the biopharma industry to generate a validated lysis buffer. We have formulated a 4M Guanidinium thiocyanate (GITC)/ Triton X-100 Lysis buffer which provides comparable results with the recommended reagents. This buffer will ease the burden on hospital labs in their heroic efforts to diagnose a large population of patients.

Article activity feed

  1. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2020.04.05.026435: (What is this?)

    Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.

    Table 1: Rigor

    Institutional Review Board Statementnot detected.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    No key resources detected.

    Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).

    Results from LimitationRecognizer: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

    Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.

    Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.

    Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.

    Results from rtransparent:
    • Thank you for including a conflict of interest statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • No funding statement was detected.
    • No protocol registration statement was detected.

    About SciScore

    SciScore is an automated tool that is designed to assist expert reviewers by finding and presenting formulaic information scattered throughout a paper in a standard, easy to digest format. SciScore checks for the presence and correctness of RRIDs (research resource identifiers), and for rigor criteria such as sex and investigator blinding. For details on the theoretical underpinning of rigor criteria and the tools shown here, including references cited, please follow this link.

  2. Version published to 10.1101/2020.04.05.026435v2 on bioRxiv
  3. Version published to 10.1101/2020.04.05.026435v1 on bioRxiv