• FluTrackers.com Inc. does not provide medical advice. Information on this web site is collected from various internet resources, and the FluTrackers board of directors makes no warranty to the safety, efficacy, correctness or completeness of the information posted on this site by any author or poster. The information collated here is for instructional and/or discussion purposes only and is NOT intended to diagnose or treat any disease, illness, or other medical condition. Every individual reader or poster should seek advice from their personal physician/healthcare practitioner before considering or using any interventions that are discussed on this website. By continuing to access this website you agree to consult your personal physican before using any interventions posted on this website, and you agree to hold harmless FluTrackers.com Inc., the board of directors, the members, and all authors and posters for any effects from use of any medication, supplement, vitamin or other substance, device, intervention, etc. mentioned in posts on this website, or other internet venues referenced in posts on this website.
  • We are not asking for any donations. Do not donate to any entity who says they are raising funds for us.

Pathogens . Comparative Evaluation of Six SARS-CoV-2 Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Approaches Shows Substantial Genomic Variant-Dependent Intra- and

tetano

Editor, Senior Moderator
Pathogens


. 2022 Apr 12;11(4):462.
doi: 10.3390/pathogens11040462.
Comparative Evaluation of Six SARS-CoV-2 Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Approaches Shows Substantial Genomic Variant-Dependent Intra- and Inter-Test Variability, Poor Interchangeability of Cycle Threshold and Complementary Turn-Around Times


Rok Kogoj[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Misa Korva[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Nataša Knap[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Katarina Resman Rus[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Patricija Pozvek[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Tatjana Avšič-Županc[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Mario Poljak[SUP] 1 [/SUP]



Affiliations
Free PMC article

Abstract

Several professional societies advise against using real-time Reverse-Transcription PCR (rtRT-PCR) cycle threshold (Ct) values to guide clinical decisions. We comparatively assessed the variability of Ct values generated by six diagnostic approaches by testing serial dilutions of well-characterized isolates of 10 clinically most relevant SARS-CoV-2 genomic variants: Alpha, Beta, Gamma, Delta, Eta, Iota, Omicron, A.27, B.1.258.17, and B.1 with D614G mutation. Comparison of three fully automated rtRT-PCR analyzers and a reference manual rtRT-PCR assay using RNA isolated with three different nucleic acid isolation instruments showed substantial inter-variant intra-test and intra-variant inter-test variability. Ct value differences were dependent on both the rtRT-PCR platform and SARS-CoV-2 genomic variant. Differences ranging from 2.0 to 8.4 Ct values were observed when testing equal concentrations of different SARS-CoV-2 variants. Results confirm that Ct values are an unreliable surrogate for viral load and should not be used as a proxy of infectivity and transmissibility, especially when different rtRT-PCR assays are used in parallel and multiple SARS-CoV-2 variants are circulating. A detailed turn-around time (TAT) comparative assessment showed substantially different TATs, but parallel use of different diagnostic approaches was beneficial and complementary, allowing release of results for more than 81% of non-priority samples within 8 h after admission.

Keywords: Ct value; coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19); genomic variant; real-time RT-PCR; severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2); turn-around time.
 
Back
Top Bottom