SEARCH · PubMed Health

Results for “COVID-19 Nucleic Acid Testing”

Explore indexed PubMed citations for clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health research. Read source abstracts and follow each citation to its original PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

6 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2025

Methods for Cas13a expression and purification for use in CRISPR diagnostics.

The threat of emerging infectious diseases (e.g., SARS-CoV-2 the RNA virus responsible for the COVID-19 pandemic) has highlighted the importance of accurate and rapid testing for screening, patient diagnosis, and effective treatment of infectious disease. Nucleic acid diagnostic tools such as qPCR are considered the gold standard, providing a sensitive, accurate, and robust method of detection. However, these conventional diagnostic platforms are resource intensive, limited in some applications, and are almost always confined to laboratory settings. With the increasing demand for low-cost, rapid, and accurate point-of-care diagnostics, CRISPR-based systems have emerged as powerful tools to augment detection capabilities. Of note is the potent RNA detection enzyme, Leptotrichia buccalis (Lbu) Cas13a, which is capable of rapid RNA detection in complex mixtures with or without pre-amplification. To support its wide-spread use, we describe a detailed method for the expression, purification, and validation of LbuCas13a for use in molecular diagnostics.

SARS-CoV-2↗

PubMed2025

Performance of Subgenomic RT-PCR for Predicting SARS-CoV-2 Infectivity Compared to Genomic RT-PCR and Culture Isolation.

SARS-CoV-2 clinical samples can be detected as positive for a long period of time using real-time RT-PCR, even when patients are no longer infectious. Viral culture is the gold standard for assessing a patient's infectivity, but it is a time-consuming technique and lacks sensitivity. SARS-CoV-2 subgenomic RNA (sgRNA) detection has been used as a proxy for assessing the infectivity but only a limited number of studies have described its use in vitro and in clinical samples. This study aimed to evaluate the correlation between results from viral culture, genomic RT-PCR (gRT-PCR), and subgenomic RT-PCR (sgRT-PCR) during in vitro infection and in clinical samples. In vitro viral replication kinetics showed that both genomic RNA (gRNA) and subgenomic RNA (sgRNA) levels remained stable up to 21 days in the absence of replication-competent virus. Using clinical samples, sgRNA was detected in 87.5% of culture-positive samples, demonstrating better performances than gRT-PCR (Positive predictive value (PPV) 93.3% and Negative predictive value (NPV) of 87.5%) and an almost perfect agreement with culture results (Cohen κ = 0.81 [95% CI: 0.66-0.95]). These findings suggest that testing for sgRNA and/or using a gRNA Ct cut-off of 21.2 could be used as a proxy to determine the presence of SARS-CoV-2 replication-competent virus.

Humans↗

PubMed2025

Viral viability markers of SARS-CoV-2: a comparison of cell culture, genomic RNA RT-PCR, and subgenomic RNA RT-PCR.

UNLABELLED: Accurate methods to assess viral viability are crucial for determining isolation duration and antiviral therapy in immunocompromised patients. Although cell culture (CC) is the gold standard, it has limitations. Cycle threshold (Ct) values from genomic RNA (gRNA) RT-PCR and subgenomic RNA (sgRNA) RT-PCR have been proposed as markers of active viral replication. This study evaluated the correlation between CC, gRNA Ct values, and sgRNA to identify the best viral viability marker. This study aimed to evaluate the correlation between CC, gRNA Ct values, and sgRNA to identify the best viral viability marker. We conducted a prospective study on immunocompromised patients with suspected SARS-CoV-2 infection at a tertiary hospital (May 2021 to May 2023). Nasopharyngeal swabs were inoculated into Vero E6 cells and tested for gRNA using RT-PCR (Cobas 6800, Roche) and for sgRNA (non-commercial RT-PCR). The sensitivity (S), specificity (SP), positive (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV), and accuracy were calculated using CC as the gold standard. Among 285 samples from 108 patients, gRNA RT-PCR had high S and NPV (1.0) but low SP (0.24) and moderate PPV (0.63). Ct analysis improved performance in extreme but not intermediate values. A Ct ≤ 30 maximized S but had low SP; Ct ≤ 25 yielded S (0.88), SP (0.89), PPV (0.92), NPV (0.84), and accuracy (0.88); sgRNA showed the highest S (0.99), SP (0.96), PPV (0.97), NPV (0.99), and accuracy (0.98). sgRNA detection is the best marker for identifying viable SARS-CoV-2, aiding decisions on isolation, antiviral treatment, or delaying chemotherapy in immunocompromised patients. IMPORTANCE: Identifying whether a patient still has contagious SARS-CoV-2 is essential for managing isolation, antiviral treatment, and other clinical decisions-especially in immunocompromised individuals. While viral culture is the gold standard for confirming viral viability, it is slow, expensive, and not widely available. Many hospitals rely on RT-PCR tests, but these detect viral genetic material whether or not the virus is still active. This study shows that detecting subgenomic RNA (sgRNA), a molecule only present when the virus is actively replicating, is a highly accurate way, a molecule only present when the virus is actively replicating, is a highly accurate way to determine whether the virus is still viable. Compared to standard PCR or viral culture, sgRNA testing better predicts who is truly infectious. These findings support sgRNA as a useful tool to guide clinical management and infection control in vulnerable patients.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Evaluation of one-step amplicon-based targeted enrichment for SARS-CoV-2 whole-genome sequencing using the Midnight amplicon scheme.

Genomic surveillance proved invaluable during the COVID-19 pandemic for tracking SARS-CoV-2 variants and guiding outbreak responses, underscoring the ongoing need to reduce whole-genome sequencing (WGS) costs and improve workflow efficiency to ensure accessibility in resource limited settings. Here, we evaluated a one-step reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) approach using the Midnight V2 primer scheme for targeted amplification of the SARS-CoV-2 genome, assessed its compatibility with Illumina sequencing, and compared its performance to a well-established two-step method. Initially, we determined optimal RT-PCR reaction conditions using the Midnight V2 primer panel for the one-step RT-PCR kit and scaled reaction volumes for both RT-PCR and library preparation. Clinical specimens (n = 53) that had undergone routine WGS for surveillance purposes using the established two-step RT-PCR method were compared using the one-step RT-PCR assay. For samples with genome completeness greater than 70%, both methods gave comparable results with similar sequence coverage and 100% concordance for lineage assignment. Further investigation revealed a higher percentage of reads aligning to the SARS-CoV-2 genome with a greater depth of coverage using the one-step method compared to the two-step method. Finally, analysis of scaled one-step and library reaction volumes revealed significant cost savings for samples undergoing WGS. Overall, the results presented here verify the accuracy and reproducibility of one-step targeted amplification and offer an efficient and cost-effective workflow for routine SARS-CoV-2 genomic surveillance.

Humans↗

PubMed2024

Diagnosis with Metagenomic Next-Generation Sequencing (mNGS) technology and real-time PCR for SARS-CoV-2 Omicron detection using various nasopharyngeal swabs in SARS-CoV-2 Omicron.

BACKGROUND: The SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant, with the main subtypes BA.5.2 and BF.7 in China, led to off-target effects on the S and N genes from December 1, 2022, to January 31, 2023. The kits used for studying and developing these agents were not adequately and independently evaluated. It is important to verify the performance of commercial Real-Time quantitative PCR (RT-qPCR) tests. OBJECTIVE: We conducted a clinical evaluation of two Real Time SARS-CoV-2 Omicron assays to verify their performance using various detection reagents and clinical specimens. METHODS: We performed clinical evaluations of two existing Chinese SARS-CoV-2 Omicron RT-qPCR kits 2019-nCoV nucleic acid diagnostic kits (Fosun Biotechnology, National instrument registration 20203400299, Shanghai, China) and COVID-19 nucleic acid detection kits (eDiagnosis Biomedicine, National instrument registration 20203400212, Wuhan, China) and using BSD (Bondson) (Guangzhou Bondson Biotechnology Co. Ltd, batch number 2022101), quality controls provided by the inspection center and a large number of clinically confirmed specimens. RESULTS: The concordance rates for the Fosun and eDiagnosis kits were 95% and 100%, respectively. The detection limit for the Fosun and eDiagnosis kits was verified to be 300 copies/mL and 500 copies/mL. The Fosun assay exhibited the largest coefficient of variation (CV) for ORF1ab and N gene at the detection limit concentration (4.80%, 3.49%), whereas eDiagnosis showed a smaller CV (0.93%, 1.10%). In the reference product from the Hangzhou Clinical Laboratory Center test, it was found that Fosun had the lowest sensitivity of 93.47% and a specificity of 100%, while eDiagnosis exhibited 100% for both sensitivity and specificity. The lowest single target gene detection rate of Fosun reagents was 68.7% for the ORF1ab gene and 87.5% for the N gene, while eDiagnosis detection rate was 100%. Among the clinical group S specimens, the missed detection rate of the Fosun reagent was 10.9%, which was higher than the 3.9% of eDiagnosis. However, there was no significant difference in the clinical diagnostic efficiency of the two reagents. CONCLUSIONS: The ORF1ab and N assays of SARS-CoV-2 Omicron on the eDiagnosis platform yielded higher values compared to those on the Fosun platform. Consequently, the eDiagnosis kit has also been used as standard detection reagents. Considering that the Fosun reagent has a relatively low detection limit and targets three single genes, it is more advantageous as a confirmatory reagent for the new museum.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

A genome-wide coverage-based pipeline for the identification of host-derived candidate DNA biomarkers from cell-free blood.

We have created a new data-analysis pipeline for the discovery of host-specific candidate DNA biomarkers derived from sequencing data of cell-free blood. Unlike approaches that rely on specific molecular or genetic signatures, our method leverages the coverage distribution of cell-free DNA sequences mapped to a reference genome, applying statistical analyses to identify informative short genomic regions for biomarker discovery. The pipeline is applicable to diverse diseases and can be used to analyze cell-free DNA sequences from plasma or serum to identify candidate biomarkers that are characteristic of disease states in mammals. Core functionalities were developed in Java and integrated with open-source software tools for the preprocessing of raw sequencing data, complemented by Python scripts for the machine-learning analysis and statistical validation. The pipeline is designed for HPC use and users can access the pipeline through a Galaxy workflow, which offers a user-friendly web interface for input selection prior to execution and analysis progress monitoring. Performance tests, carried out using duplicate sets of COVID-19 samples and controls, showed linear scalability of execution time with an increasing dataset size, as well as a substantial reduction in execution time through parallelized computation, whereby each HPC node is used to process the data of one chromosome. Further statistical tests confirmed the quality of the pipeline's results by showing that the set of identified candidate biomarkers remained stable across varying dataset sizes.

Biomarkers↗