tetano
Editor, Senior Moderator
Sci Transl Med
. 2021 Feb 22;eabf2823.
doi: 10.1126/scitranslmed.abf2823. Online ahead of print.
Lessons from applied large-scale pooling of 133,816 SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR tests
Netta Barak[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Roni Ben-Ami[SUP] 2 3 [/SUP], Tal Sido[SUP] 3 4 [/SUP], Amir Perri[SUP] 5 [/SUP], Aviad Shtoyer[SUP] 5 [/SUP], Mila Rivkin[SUP] 3 [/SUP], Tamar Licht[SUP] 6 [/SUP], Ayelet Peretz[SUP] 2 [/SUP], Judith Magenheim[SUP] 2 [/SUP], Irit Fogel[SUP] 3 [/SUP], Ayalah Livneh[SUP] 3 [/SUP], Yutti Daitch[SUP] 3 [/SUP], Esther Oiknine-Djian[SUP] 3 [/SUP], Gil Benedek[SUP] 3 7 [/SUP], Yuval Dor[SUP] 8 [/SUP], Dana G Wolf[SUP] 9 10 [/SUP], Moran Yassour[SUP] 11 12 [/SUP], Hebrew University-Hadassah COVID-19 Diagnosis Team
Collaborators, Affiliations
Abstract
Pooling multiple swab samples prior to RNA extraction and real-time reverse-transcription (RT-PCR) analysis has been proposed as a strategy to reduce costs and increase throughput of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) tests. However, reports on practical large-scale group testing for SARS-CoV-2 have been scant. Key open questions concern reduced sensitivity due to sample dilution, the rate of false positives, the actual efficiency (number of tests saved by pooling), and the impact of infection rate in the population on assay performance. Here we report an analysis of 133,816 samples collected between April-September 2020 and tested by Dorfman pooling for the presence of SARS-CoV-2. We spared 76% of RNA extraction and RT-PCR tests, despite the frequently changing prevalence (0.5%-6%). We observed pooling efficiency and sensitivity that exceeded theoretical predictions, which resulted from the non-random distribution of positive samples in pools. Overall, our findings support the use of pooling for efficient large-scale SARS-CoV-2 testing.
. 2021 Feb 22;eabf2823.
doi: 10.1126/scitranslmed.abf2823. Online ahead of print.
Lessons from applied large-scale pooling of 133,816 SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR tests
Netta Barak[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Roni Ben-Ami[SUP] 2 3 [/SUP], Tal Sido[SUP] 3 4 [/SUP], Amir Perri[SUP] 5 [/SUP], Aviad Shtoyer[SUP] 5 [/SUP], Mila Rivkin[SUP] 3 [/SUP], Tamar Licht[SUP] 6 [/SUP], Ayelet Peretz[SUP] 2 [/SUP], Judith Magenheim[SUP] 2 [/SUP], Irit Fogel[SUP] 3 [/SUP], Ayalah Livneh[SUP] 3 [/SUP], Yutti Daitch[SUP] 3 [/SUP], Esther Oiknine-Djian[SUP] 3 [/SUP], Gil Benedek[SUP] 3 7 [/SUP], Yuval Dor[SUP] 8 [/SUP], Dana G Wolf[SUP] 9 10 [/SUP], Moran Yassour[SUP] 11 12 [/SUP], Hebrew University-Hadassah COVID-19 Diagnosis Team
Collaborators, Affiliations
- PMID: 33619081
- DOI: 10.1126/scitranslmed.abf2823
Abstract
Pooling multiple swab samples prior to RNA extraction and real-time reverse-transcription (RT-PCR) analysis has been proposed as a strategy to reduce costs and increase throughput of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) tests. However, reports on practical large-scale group testing for SARS-CoV-2 have been scant. Key open questions concern reduced sensitivity due to sample dilution, the rate of false positives, the actual efficiency (number of tests saved by pooling), and the impact of infection rate in the population on assay performance. Here we report an analysis of 133,816 samples collected between April-September 2020 and tested by Dorfman pooling for the presence of SARS-CoV-2. We spared 76% of RNA extraction and RT-PCR tests, despite the frequently changing prevalence (0.5%-6%). We observed pooling efficiency and sensitivity that exceeded theoretical predictions, which resulted from the non-random distribution of positive samples in pools. Overall, our findings support the use of pooling for efficient large-scale SARS-CoV-2 testing.