Optimization of SARS-CoV-2 detection by RT-QPCR without RNA extraction

This article has been Reviewed by the following groups

Read the full article

Abstract

Rapid and reliable screening of SARS-CoV-2 is fundamental to assess viral spread and limit the pandemic we are facing. In this study we evaluated the reliability and the efficiency of a direct RT-QPCR method (without RNA extraction) using SeeGene Allplex™ 2019-nCoV RT-QPCR and the influence of swab storage media composition on further viral detection.

We show that SeeGene’s assay provides similar efficiency as the RealStar ® SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR kit (Altona Diagnostics), and that RNA extraction is not necessary nor advantageous if samples are stored in UTM or molecular water but is recommended if samples are stored in saline solution and in Hanks medium.

Article activity feed

  1. SciScore for 10.1101/2020.04.06.028902: (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

    Software and Algorithms
    SentencesResources
    RNA was extracted from 700 μl of 2 ml of patient’s swab medium using Abbott mSample Preparation Systems DNA kit on m2000sp instrument; the eluate was 90 μl.
    Abbott mSample Preparation Systems
    suggested: None
    RT-QPCR plates were automated: prepared on the Abbott m2000sp and routinely detected on m2000rt using the Altona RealStar® SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR Kit RUO according to the manufacturer’s instruction.
    Abbott
    suggested: (Abbott, RRID:SCR_010477)

    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:
    • No conflict of interest statement was detected. If there are no conflicts, we encourage authors to explicit state so.
    • 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.