Accuracy of Real-Time Polymerase Chain Reaction in COVID-19 Patients
- PMID: 35170995
- PMCID: PMC8849071
- DOI: 10.1128/spectrum.00591-21
Accuracy of Real-Time Polymerase Chain Reaction in COVID-19 Patients
Abstract
Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a mild to severe respiratory illness caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). The diagnostic accuracy of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)- or World Health Organization (WHO)-recommended real-time PCR (RT-qPCR) primers in clinical practice remains unproven. We conducted a prospective study on the accuracy of RT-qPCR using an in-house-designed primer set (iNP) targeting the nucleocapsid protein as well as various recommended and commercial primers. The accuracy was assessed by culturing or seroconversion. We enrolled 12 confirmed COVID-19 patients with a total of 590 clinical samples. When a cutoff value of the cycle threshold (Ct) was set to 35, RT-qPCRs with WHO RdRp primers and CDC N1, N2, and N3 primers showed sensitivity of 42.1% to 63.2% and specificity of 90.5% to 100% in sputum, and sensitivity of 65.2% to 69.6% and specificity of 65.2% to 69.6% in nasopharyngeal samples. The sensitivity and specificity of iNP RT-qPCR in sputum and nasopharyngeal samples were 94.8%/100% and 69.6%/100%, respectively. Sputum testing had the highest sensitivity, followed by nasopharyngeal testing (P = 0.0193); self-collected saliva samples yielded better characteristics than oropharyngeal samples (P = 0.0032). Our results suggest that iNP RT-qPCR has better sensitivity and specificity than RT-PCR with WHO (P < 0.0001) or CDC (N1: P = 0.0012, N2: P = 0.0013, N3: P = 0.0012) primers. Sputum RT-qPCR analysis has the highest sensitivity, followed by nasopharyngeal, saliva, and oropharyngeal assays. Our study suggests that considerable improvement is needed for the RT-qPCR WHO and CDC primer sets for detecting SARS-CoV-2. IMPORTANCE Numerous research campaigns have addressed the vast majority of clinical and diagnostic specificity and sensitivity of various primer sets of SARS-CoV2 viral detection. Despite the impressive progress made to resolve the pandemic, there is still a need for continuous and active improvement of primers used for diagnosis in clinical practice. Our study significantly exceeds the scale of previously published research on the specificity and sensitivity of different primers comparing with different specimens and is the most comprehensive to date in terms of constant monitoring of primer sets of current usage. Henceforth, our results suggest that sputum samples sensitivity is the highest, followed by nasopharyngeal, saliva, and oropharyngeal samples. The CDC recommends the use of oropharyngeal specimens, leading to certain discrepancy between the guidelines set forth by the CDC and IDSA. We proved that the oropharyngeal samples demonstrated the lowest sensitivity for the detection of SARS-CoV-2.
Keywords: COVID-19; E gene; NP gene; RdRp-gene; SARS-CoV-2; real-time polymerase chain reaction; sensitivity; specificity.
Conflict of interest statement
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Figures
Similar articles
-
Development and Evaluation of AccuPower COVID-19 Multiplex Real-Time RT-PCR Kit and AccuPower SARS-CoV-2 Multiplex Real-Time RT-PCR Kit for SARS-CoV-2 Detection in Sputum, NPS/OPS, Saliva and Pooled Samples.PLoS One. 2022 Feb 10;17(2):e0263341. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0263341. eCollection 2022. PLoS One. 2022. PMID: 35143538 Free PMC article.
-
Diagnostic Performance of Self-Collected Saliva Versus Nasopharyngeal Swab for the Molecular Detection of SARS-CoV-2 in the Clinical Setting.Microbiol Spectr. 2021 Dec 22;9(3):e0046821. doi: 10.1128/Spectrum.00468-21. Epub 2021 Nov 3. Microbiol Spectr. 2021. PMID: 34730436 Free PMC article.
-
SARS-CoV-2 Presence in the Saliva, Tears, and Cerumen of COVID-19 Patients.Laryngoscope. 2021 May;131(5):E1677-E1682. doi: 10.1002/lary.29218. Epub 2020 Nov 19. Laryngoscope. 2021. PMID: 33094833
-
Detection of SARS-CoV-2 using real-time polymerase chain reaction in different clinical specimens: A critical review.Allergol Immunopathol (Madr). 2021 Jan 2;49(1):159-164. doi: 10.15586/aei.v49i1.60. eCollection 2021. Allergol Immunopathol (Madr). 2021. PMID: 33528945 Review.
-
Diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 by RT-PCR Using Different Sample Sources: Review of the Literature.Ear Nose Throat J. 2021 Apr;100(2_suppl):131S-138S. doi: 10.1177/0145561320953231. Epub 2020 Aug 31. Ear Nose Throat J. 2021. PMID: 32865458 Free PMC article. Review.
Cited by
-
RT-qPCR Testing and Performance Metrics in the COVID-19 Era.Int J Mol Sci. 2024 Aug 28;25(17):9326. doi: 10.3390/ijms25179326. Int J Mol Sci. 2024. PMID: 39273275 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Comparable Efficacy of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Remdesivir in Reducing Viral Load and Shedding Duration in Patients with COVID-19.Microorganisms. 2024 Aug 16;12(8):1696. doi: 10.3390/microorganisms12081696. Microorganisms. 2024. PMID: 39203538 Free PMC article.
-
Comprehensive Review of COVID-19: Epidemiology, Pathogenesis, Advancement in Diagnostic and Detection Techniques, and Post-Pandemic Treatment Strategies.Int J Mol Sci. 2024 Jul 26;25(15):8155. doi: 10.3390/ijms25158155. Int J Mol Sci. 2024. PMID: 39125722 Free PMC article. Review.
-
From Archipelago to Pandemic Battleground: Unveiling Indonesia's COVID-19 Crisis.J Epidemiol Glob Health. 2023 Dec;13(4):591-603. doi: 10.1007/s44197-023-00148-7. Epub 2023 Sep 14. J Epidemiol Glob Health. 2023. PMID: 37707715 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Cost-effectiveness analysis of COVID-19 tests in the unified health system.Cost Eff Resour Alloc. 2023 Sep 13;21(1):64. doi: 10.1186/s12962-023-00469-1. Cost Eff Resour Alloc. 2023. PMID: 37705076 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Guan W-j, Ni Z-y, Hu Y, Liang W-h, Ou C-q, He J-x, Liu L, Shan H, Lei C-l, Hui DSC, Du B, Li L-j, Zeng G, Yuen K-Y, Chen R-c, Tang C-l, Wang T, Chen P-y, Xiang J, Li S-y, Wang J-l, Liang Z-j, Peng Y-x, Wei L, Liu Y, Hu Y-h, Peng P, Wang J-m, Liu J-y, Chen Z, Li G, Zheng Z-j, Qiu S-q, Luo J, Ye C-j, Zhu S-y, Zhong N-s. 2020. Clinical characteristics of 2019 novel coronavirus infection in China. N Engl J Med 382:1708–1720. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa2002032. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
-
- Liu DX, Liang JQ, Fung TS. 2021. Human Coronavirus-229E, -OC43, -NL63, and -HKU1. Encyclopedia of Virology 2:428–440. doi:10.1016/B978-0-12-809633-8.21501-X. - DOI
-
- He X, Lau EHY, Wu P, Deng X, Wang J, Hao X, Lau YC, Wong JY, Guan Y, Tan X, Mo X, Chen Y, Liao B, Chen W, Hu F, Zhang Q, Zhong M, Wu Y, Zhao L, Zhang F, Cowling BJ, Li F, Leung GM. 2020. Temporal dynamics in viral shedding and transmissibility of COVID-19. Nat Med 26:672–675. doi:10.1038/s41591-020-0869-5. - DOI - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
Research Materials
Miscellaneous