Multi-site Evaluation of SARS-CoV-2 Spike Mutation Detection Using a Multiplex Real-time RT-PCR Assay

This article has been Reviewed by the following groups

Read the full article See related articles

Abstract

Background

SARS-CoV-2 causes COVID-19, which can be fatal and is responsible for a global pandemic. Variants with increased transmissibility or the potential to evade immunity have emerged and represent a threat to global pandemic control. Variants of concern (VOC) can be identified by sequencing of viral RNA, or by more rapid methods for detection of subsets of signature mutations.

Methods

We developed a multiplex, real-time RT-PCR assay (cobas ® SARS-CoV-2 Variant Set 1) for the qualitative detection and differentiation of three key SARS-CoV-2 mutations in the viral spike protein: del 69-70, E484K and N501Y. Analytical sensitivity and accuracy were evaluated at three testing sites using clinical specimens from patients infected with SARS-CoV-2 variants belonging to several different lineages, including B.1.1.7, B.1.351, and P.1.

Results

The limit of detection for E484K was between 180 and 620 IU/mL for the three different isolates tested. For N501Y, the LOD was between 270 and 720 IU/mL (five isolates), while for del 69-70, it was 80 - 92 IU/mL (two isolates). Valid test results were obtained with all clinical specimens that were positive using routine diagnostic tests. Compared to sequencing (Sanger and next-generation), test results were 100% concordant at all three loci; no false positive or false negative results were observed.

Conclusions

Data collected at three independent laboratories indicates excellent performance and concordance of cobas ® SARS-CoV-2 Variant Set 1 with sequencing. New sets of primers and probes that target additional loci can be rapidly deployed in response to the identification of other emerging variants.

Article activity feed

  1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.05.05.21254713: (What is this?)

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

    Table 1: Rigor

    EthicsIRB: Patient specimens were collected and used according to institutional review board regulations in effect at each site.
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.
    Cell Line AuthenticationContamination: The eight bacteria were bordetella pertussis, chlamydia pneumoniae, haemophilus influenzae, legionella pneumophila, mycobacterium tuberculosis, mycoplasma pneumoniae, streptococcus pyogenes, streptococcus pneumoniae.

    Table 2: Resources

    Experimental Models: Cell Lines
    SentencesResources
    Virus stocks for assay performance evaluation, including analytical sensitivity, were prepared by culturing virus from de-identified patient specimens in Vero cells.
    Vero
    suggested: CLS Cat# 605372/p622_VERO, RRID:CVCL_0059)
    Experimental Models: Organisms/Strains
    SentencesResources
    Clinical specimens: Residual de-identified clinical specimens from three routine testing sites were used: Labor Berlin (Berlin, Germany), Bioscentia Labor (Ingelheim am Rhein, Germany), and the Institute of Clinical Microbiology and Hygiene, University Hospital of Regensburg (Regensburg, Germany).
    Labor Berlin
    suggested: None
    Software and Algorithms
    SentencesResources
    The primers and probes were designed based on SARS-CoV-2 sequences in the GISAID and NCBI databases (total over 345,000 sequences) and were designed to provide maximum inclusivity for detecting the targets in each channel.
    NCBI
    suggested: (NCBI, RRID:SCR_006472)

    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.

    Results from scite Reference Check: We found no unreliable references.


    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.