tetano
Editor, Senior Moderator
J Virol Methods
. 2021 May 26;114185.
doi: 10.1016/j.jviromet.2021.114185. Online ahead of print.
Digital PCR assay for the effective detection of COVID-19 patients with SARS-CoV-2 low viral load
Yong Sun[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Chengchao Ding[SUP] 2 [/SUP], Qingqing Chen[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Jiajia Xie[SUP] 2 [/SUP], Junling Yu[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Yonglin Shi[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Chengcheng Jiang[SUP] 2 [/SUP], Zhuhui Zhang[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Hongliang He[SUP] 2 [/SUP], Yinglu Ge[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Wenting Li[SUP] 2 [/SUP], Jun He[SUP] 3 [/SUP], Yong Gao[SUP] 4 [/SUP]
Affiliations
Abstract
Objective: Viral nucleic acid detection by real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) is the current standard method for diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection. However, due to low viral load in some COVID-19 patients, false negative results from this method have been repeatedly reported.
Method: In this study, we compared the sensitivity and specificity of digital PCR (dPCR) in simulated samples and clinical samples with qPCR assay through a series of vigorous tests.
Results: The results showed that dPCR was more sensitive than qPCR especially for samples with low viral load (≤3 copies). In addition, dPCR had similar specificity as qPCR and could effectively distinguish other human coronaviruses and influenza virus from SARS-CoV-2. More importantly, dPCR was more sensitive than qPCR in detecting the virus in the "negative" samples from recurrent COVID-19 patients.
Conclusions: In summary, dPCR could serve as a powerful complement to the current qPCR method for SARS-CoV-2 detection, especially for the samples with extremely low viral load, such as recurrent COVID-19 patients.
Keywords: SARS-CoV-2; digital PCR (dPCR); recurrent COVID-19 patient; sensitivity; specificity.
. 2021 May 26;114185.
doi: 10.1016/j.jviromet.2021.114185. Online ahead of print.
Digital PCR assay for the effective detection of COVID-19 patients with SARS-CoV-2 low viral load
Yong Sun[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Chengchao Ding[SUP] 2 [/SUP], Qingqing Chen[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Jiajia Xie[SUP] 2 [/SUP], Junling Yu[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Yonglin Shi[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Chengcheng Jiang[SUP] 2 [/SUP], Zhuhui Zhang[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Hongliang He[SUP] 2 [/SUP], Yinglu Ge[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Wenting Li[SUP] 2 [/SUP], Jun He[SUP] 3 [/SUP], Yong Gao[SUP] 4 [/SUP]
Affiliations
- PMID: 34051244
- DOI: 10.1016/j.jviromet.2021.114185
Abstract
Objective: Viral nucleic acid detection by real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) is the current standard method for diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection. However, due to low viral load in some COVID-19 patients, false negative results from this method have been repeatedly reported.
Method: In this study, we compared the sensitivity and specificity of digital PCR (dPCR) in simulated samples and clinical samples with qPCR assay through a series of vigorous tests.
Results: The results showed that dPCR was more sensitive than qPCR especially for samples with low viral load (≤3 copies). In addition, dPCR had similar specificity as qPCR and could effectively distinguish other human coronaviruses and influenza virus from SARS-CoV-2. More importantly, dPCR was more sensitive than qPCR in detecting the virus in the "negative" samples from recurrent COVID-19 patients.
Conclusions: In summary, dPCR could serve as a powerful complement to the current qPCR method for SARS-CoV-2 detection, especially for the samples with extremely low viral load, such as recurrent COVID-19 patients.
Keywords: SARS-CoV-2; digital PCR (dPCR); recurrent COVID-19 patient; sensitivity; specificity.