Scinovex
article Open AccessTop 1% cited

Improved Molecular Diagnosis of COVID-19 by the Novel, Highly Sensitive and Specific COVID-19-RdRp/Hel Real-Time Reverse Transcription-PCR Assay Validated <i>In Vitro</i> and with Clinical Specimens

Journal of Clinical Microbiology · 2020 · Vol. 58(5)
Jasper Fuk‐Woo ChanCyril Chik‐Yan YipKelvin Kai‐Wang ToTommy Hing‐Cheung TangSally C. Y. WongKit‐Hang LeungAgnes Yim-Fong FungAnthony Chin‐Ki NgZijiao ZouHoi‐Wah TsoiGarnet Kwan-Yue ChoiAnthony Raymond TamVincent Chi‐Chung ChengKwok‐Hung ChanOwen Tak‐Yin TsangKwok‐Yung Yuen

Abstract

On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization was informed of a cluster of cases of pneumonia of unknown etiology in Wuhan, China. Subsequent investigations identified a novel coronavirus, now named severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), from the affected patients. Highly sensitive and specific laboratory diagnostics are important for controlling the rapidly evolving SARS-CoV-2-associated coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) epidemic. In this study, we developed and compared the performance of three novel real-time reverse transcription-PCR (RT-PCR) assays targeting the RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp)/helicase (Hel), spike (S), and nucleocapsid (N) genes of SARS-CoV-2 with that of the reported RdRp-P2 assay, which is used in >30 European laboratories. Among the three novel assays, the COVID-19-RdRp/Hel assay had the lowest limit of detection <i>in vitro</i> (1.8 50% tissue culture infective doses [TCID<sub>50</sub>]/ml with genomic RNA and 11.2 RNA copies/reaction with <i>in vitro</i> RNA transcripts). Among 273 specimens from 15 patients with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 in Hong Kong, 77 (28.2%) were positive by both the COVID-19-RdRp/Hel and RdRp-P2 assays. The COVID-19-RdRp/Hel assay was positive for an additional 42 RdRp-P2-negative specimens (119/273 [43.6%] versus 77/273 [28.2%]; <i>P</i> < 0.001), including 29/120 (24.2%) respiratory tract specimens and 13/153 (8.5%) non-respiratory tract specimens. The mean viral load of these specimens was 3.21 × 10<sup>4</sup> RNA copies/ml (range, 2.21 × 10<sup>2</sup> to 4.71 × 10<sup>5</sup> RNA copies/ml). The COVID-19-RdRp/Hel assay did not cross-react with other human-pathogenic coronaviruses and respiratory pathogens in cell culture and clinical specimens, whereas the RdRp-P2 assay cross-reacted with SARS-CoV in cell culture. The highly sensitive and specific COVID-19-RdRp/Hel assay may help to improve the laboratory diagnosis of COVID-19.

SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 ResearchSARS-CoV-2 detection and testingViral gastroenteritis research and epidemiologyVirologyBiologyCoronavirusReverse transcription polymerase chain reactionCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)HelicaseSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)RNA polymeraseReverse transcriptasePneumonia

MeSH terms

BetacoronavirusCOVID-19SARS-CoV-2COVID-19 VaccinesCOVID-19 TestingAdultAgedAnimalsChlorocebus aethiopsChinaFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPneumonia, Viral

Funding

  • Pfizer
  • Gilead Sciences
  • Astellas Pharma
Citations
934
FWCI
22.31
field-weighted impact
References
36
Percentile
99%
vs. same field & year
Citations per year
Citation Network

How this paper connects to the literature. Drag to explore, click any node to open that paper.