Analytical and Clinical Validation for RT-qPCR Detection of SARS-CoV-2 Without RNA Extraction
Author
dc.contributor.author
Miranda, José P.
Author
dc.contributor.author
Osorio, Javiera
Author
dc.contributor.author
Videla, Mauricio
Author
dc.contributor.author
Angel, Gladys
Author
dc.contributor.author
Camponovo, Rossana
Author
dc.contributor.author
Henríquez Henríquez, Marcela
Admission date
dc.date.accessioned
2021-05-06T21:54:11Z
Available date
dc.date.available
2021-05-06T21:54:11Z
Publication date
dc.date.issued
2020
Cita de ítem
dc.identifier.citation
Frontiers in Medicine October 2020 | Volume 7 | Article 567572
es_ES
Identifier
dc.identifier.other
10.3389/fmed.2020.567572
Identifier
dc.identifier.uri
https://repositorio.uchile.cl/handle/2250/179479
Abstract
dc.description.abstract
Background: The recent COVID-19 pandemic has posed an unprecedented challenge to laboratory diagnosis, based on the amplification of SARS-CoV-2 RNA. With global contagion figures exceeding 4 million persons, the shortage of reagents for RNA extraction represents a bottleneck for testing globally. We present the validation results for an RT-qPCR protocol without prior RNA extraction. Due to its simplicity, this protocol is suitable for widespread application in resource-limited settings.
Methods: Optimal direct protocol was selected by comparing RT-qPCR performance under a set of thermal (65, 70, and 95 degrees for 5, 10, and 30 min) and amplification conditions (3 or 3.5 uL loading volume; 2 commercial RT-qPCR kits with a limit of detection below 10 copies/reaction) in nasopharyngeal swabs stored at 4 degrees C in sterile Weise's buffer pH 7.2. The selected protocol was evaluated for classification concordance with a standard protocol (automated RNA extraction) in 130 routine samples and 50 historical samples with Cq values near to the clinical decision limit.
Results: Optimal selected conditions for direct protocol were: thermal shock at 70 degrees C for 10 min, loading 3.5 ul in the RT-qPCR. Prospective evaluation in 130 routine samples showed a 100% classification concordance with the standard protocol. The evaluation in historical samples, selected because their Cqs were at the clinical decision limit, showed 94% concordance with our confirmatory standard, which includes manual RNA extraction.
Conclusions : Our results validate the use of this direct RT-qPCR protocol as a safe alternative for SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis in the case of a shortage of reagents for RNA extraction, with minimal clinical impact.