Literature DB >> 33554519

Variability of cycle threshold values in an external quality assessment scheme for detection of the SARS-CoV-2 virus genome by RT-PCR.

Christoph Buchta1, Irene Görzer2, Peter Chiba1, Jeremy V Camp2, Heidemarie Holzmann2, Elisabeth Puchhammer-Stöckl2, Maximilian Mayerhofer3, Mathias M Müller1, Stephan W Aberle2.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: The qualitative results of SARS-CoV-2 specific real-time reverse transcription (RT) PCR are used for initial diagnosis and follow-up of Covid-19 patients and asymptomatic virus carriers. However, clinical decision-making and health management policies often are based additionally on cycle threshold (Ct) values (i.e., quantitative results) to guide patient care, segregation and discharge management of individuals testing positive. Therefore, an analysis of inter-protocol variability is needed to assess the comparability of the quantitative results.
METHODS: Ct values reported in a SARS-CoV-2 virus genome detection external quality assessment challenge were analyzed. Three positive and two negative samples were distributed to participating test laboratories. Qualitative results (positive/negative) and quantitative results (Ct values) were assessed.
RESULTS: A total of 66 laboratories participated, contributing results from 101 distinct test systems and reporting Ct values for a total of 92 different protocols. In all three positive samples, the means of the Ct values for the E-, N-, S-, RdRp-, and ORF1ab-genes varied by less than two cycles. However, 7.7% of reported results deviated by more than ±4.0 (maximum 18.0) cycles from the respective individual means. These larger deviations appear to be systematic errors.
CONCLUSIONS: In an attempt to use PCR diagnostics beyond the identification of infected individuals, laboratories are frequently requested to report Ct values along with a qualitative result. This study highlights the limitations of interpreting Ct values from the various SARS-CoV genome detection protocols and suggests that standardization is necessary in the reporting of Ct values with respect to the target gene.
© 2020 Christoph Buchta et al., published by De Gruyter, Berlin/Boston.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Covid-19; SARS-CoV-2; cycle threshold; external quality assessment; molecular test

Year:  2020        PMID: 33554519     DOI: 10.1515/cclm-2020-1602

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Chem Lab Med        ISSN: 1434-6621            Impact factor:   3.694


  11 in total

1.  Detection of SARS-CoV-2 VOC-Omicron using commercial sample-to-answer real-time RT-PCR platforms and melting curve-based SNP assays.

Authors:  Brian H M Sit; Kathy Hiu Laam Po; Yuk-Yam Cheung; Alan K L Tsang; Patricia K L Leung; J Zheng; Alison Y T Lam; Edman T K Lam; Ken H L Ng; Rickjason C W Chan
Journal:  J Clin Virol Plus       Date:  2022-06-17

2.  SARS-CoV-2 screening in cancer outpatients during the second wave of the COVID-19 pandemic : Conclusions for crisis response at a high-volume oncology center.

Authors:  Julia M Berger; Margaretha Gansterer; Wolfgang Trutschnig; Arne C Bathke; Robert Strassl; Wolfgang Lamm; Markus Raderer; Matthias Preusser; Anna S Berghoff
Journal:  Wien Klin Wochenschr       Date:  2021-08-19       Impact factor: 1.704

3.  The importance of external quality assessment data in evaluating SARS-CoV-2 virus genome detection assays.

Authors:  Christoph Buchta; Mathias M Müller; Andrea Griesmacher
Journal:  Lancet Microbe       Date:  2022-01-25

4.  Update of Guidelines for Laboratory Diagnosis of COVID-19 in Korea.

Authors:  Ki Ho Hong; Gab Jung Kim; Kyoung Ho Roh; Heungsup Sung; Jaehyeon Lee; So Yeon Kim; Taek Soo Kim; Jae-Sun Park; Hee Jae Huh; Younhee Park; Jae-Seok Kim; Hyun Soo Kim; Moon-Woo Seong; Nam Hee Ryoo; Sang Hoon Song; Hyukmin Lee; Gye Cheol Kwon; Cheon Kwon Yoo
Journal:  Ann Lab Med       Date:  2022-07-01       Impact factor: 4.941

5.  Choice of SARS-CoV-2 diagnostic test: challenges and key considerations for the future.

Authors:  Fausto Baldanti; Nirmal K Ganguly; Guiqiang Wang; Martin Möckel; Luke A O'Neill; Harald Renz; Carlos Eduardo Dos Santos Ferreira; Kazuhiro Tateda; Barbara Van Der Pol
Journal:  Crit Rev Clin Lab Sci       Date:  2022-03-15       Impact factor: 6.250

6.  Comparative Evaluation of Six SARS-CoV-2 Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Approaches Shows Substantial Genomic Variant-Dependent Intra- and Inter-Test Variability, Poor Interchangeability of Cycle Threshold and Complementary Turn-Around Times.

Authors:  Rok Kogoj; Misa Korva; Nataša Knap; Katarina Resman Rus; Patricija Pozvek; Tatjana Avšič-Županc; Mario Poljak
Journal:  Pathogens       Date:  2022-04-12

7.  Evaluation of Intra- and Interlaboratory Variations in SARS-CoV-2 Real-Time RT-PCR Through Nationwide Proficiency Testing.

Authors:  Kuenyoul Park; Heungsup Sung; Sail Chun; Won-Ki Min
Journal:  Lab Med       Date:  2022-06-14

Review 8.  The Significance of External Quality Assessment Schemes for Molecular Testing in Clinical Laboratories.

Authors:  Nele Laudus; Lynn Nijs; Inne Nauwelaers; Elisabeth M C Dequeker
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2022-07-28       Impact factor: 6.575

9.  The Takara SARS-CoV-2 direct PCR detection kit delivers reliable results with throat wash specimens.

Authors:  M Nitsch; T Stahlhut; O Schildgen; V Schildgen
Journal:  New Microbes New Infect       Date:  2022-09-05

10.  Validation of a rapid antigen test as a screening tool for SARS-CoV-2 infection in asymptomatic populations. Sensitivity, specificity and predictive values.

Authors:  Alejandro Fernandez-Montero; Josepmaria Argemi; José Antonio Rodríguez; Arturo H Ariño; Laura Moreno-Galarraga
Journal:  EClinicalMedicine       Date:  2021-06-09
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.