Comparison of media and standards for SARS-CoV-2 RT-qPCR without prior RNA preparation

  1. Katherine B. Ragan
  2. Sanchita Bhadra
  3. Joon H. Choi
  4. Dalton Towers
  5. Christopher S. Sullivan
  6. Andrew D. Ellington

Reviewed by

Read the full article See related articles

Discuss this preprint

Start a discussion What are Sciety discussions?

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

Since the emergence of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic, there have been demands on the testing infrastructure that have strained testing capacity. As a simplification of method, we confirm the efficacy of RNA extraction-free RT-qPCR and saline as an alternative patient sample storage buffer. In addition, amongst potential reagent shortages, it has sometimes been difficult to obtain inactivated viral particles. We have therefore also characterized armored SARS-CoV-2 RNA from Asuragen as an alternative diagnostic standard to ATCC genomic SARS-CoV-2 RNA and heat inactivated virions and provide guidelines for its use in RT-qPCR.

Article activity feed

  1. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2020.08.01.20166173: (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 found bar graphs of continuous data. We recommend replacing bar graphs with more informative graphics, as many different datasets can lead to the same bar graph. The actual data may suggest different conclusions from the summary statistics. For more information, please see Weissgerber et al (2015).

    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.
    • Thank you for including a funding statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • 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 10.1101/2020.08.01.20166173 on medRxiv