One-Seq: A Highly Scalable Sequencing-Based Diagnostic for SARS-CoV-2 and Other Single-Stranded Viruses

This article has been Reviewed by the following groups

Read the full article See related articles

Abstract

The management of pandemics such as COVID-19 requires highly scalable and sensitive viral diagnostics, together with variant identification. Next-generation sequencing (NGS) has many attractive features for highly multiplexed testing, however current sequencing-based methods are limited in throughput by early processing steps on individual samples (e.g. RNA extraction and PCR amplification). Here we report a new method, “One-Seq”, that eliminates the current bottlenecks in scalability by enabling early pooling of samples, before any extraction or amplification steps. To enable early pooling, we developed a one-pot reaction for efficient reverse transcription (RT) and upfront barcoding in extraction-free clinical samples, and a “protector” strategy in which carefully designed competing oligonucleotides prevent barcode crosstalk and preserve detection of the high dynamic range of viral load in clinical samples. This method is highly sensitive, achieving a limit of detection (LoD) down to 2.5 genome copy equivalent (gce) in contrived RT samples, 10 gce in multiplexed sequencing, and 2-5 gce with multi-primer detection, suggesting an LoD of 200-500 gce/ml for clinical testing. In clinical specimens, One-Seq showed quantitative viral detection against clinical Ct values with 6 logs of linear dynamic range and detection of SARS-CoV-2 positive samples down to ∼360 gce/ml. In addition, One-Seq reports a number of hotspot viral mutations at equal scalability at no extra cost. Scaling up One-Seq would allow a throughput of 100,000-1,000,000 tests per day per single clinical lab, at an estimated amortized reagent cost of $1.5 per test and turn-around time of 7.5-15 hr.

Article activity feed

  1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.04.12.21253357: (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
    The purified library sample was then normalized using either Qubit or Agilent TapeStation before proceeding to sequencing run.
    Agilent TapeStation
    suggested: (Agilent TapeStation Laptop, RRID:SCR_019547)
    Sequencing analysis: The bioinformatic analysis of sequencing results was performed in a few steps: FASTQ generation and adapter trimming (Illumina BaseSpace), sequence alignment (bowtie2), demultiplexing and read counting (custom scripts in MATLAB and Excel).
    MATLAB
    suggested: (MATLAB, RRID:SCR_001622)

    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.
    • 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.