| Literature DB >> 35681292 |
Jia Kong1, Wenxin Li1, Jinyao Hu1, Shixuan Zhao1, Tianli Yue1,2, Zhonghong Li1,2, Yinqiang Xia1.
Abstract
Since the outbreak of coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19), cold-chain food contamination caused by the pathogenic severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) has attracted huge concern. Cold-chain foods provide a congenial environment for SARS-CoV-2 survival, which presents a potential risk for public health. Strengthening the SARS-CoV-2 supervision of cold-chain foods has become the top priority in many countries. Methodologically, the potential safety risks and precaution measures of SARS-CoV-2 contamination on cold-chain food are analyzed. To ensure the safety of cold-chain foods, the advances in SARS-CoV-2 detection strategies are summarized based on technical principles and target biomarkers. In particular, the techniques suitable for SARS-CoV-2 detection in a cold-chain environment are discussed. Although many quarantine techniques are available, the field-based quarantine technique on cold-chain food with characteristics of real-time, sensitive, specific, portable, and large-scale application is urgently needed.Entities:
Keywords: SARS-CoV-2; cold-chain foods; food safety; precaution; quarantine
Year: 2022 PMID: 35681292 PMCID: PMC9180738 DOI: 10.3390/foods11111540
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Foods ISSN: 2304-8158
Figure 1The possible solutions for the potential SARS-CoV-2 contaminated risks during the six links in the cold-chain.
Figure 2The advanced quarantine methods for SARS-CoV-2. For SARS-CoV-2 quarantine, many test techniques including nucleic acid and immunological methods are available. Nucleic acid tests include whole-genome sequencing and specific gene detection (A). Immunological tests include antigen tests (B), antibody immunological tests (C), and cytokine storm diagnoses (D). RT-PCR(Reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction), LAMP (Loop-mediated isothermal amplification), CRISPR (Clustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeats), LFIA (Lateral-flow immunochromatographic assay), FET (Field-effect transistor), ELISA (Enzyme linked immunosorbent assay), xMAP (Multi-analyte profiling), SERS(Surface-enhanced raman scattering).
The advance of SARS-CoV-2 test techniques.
| Methods | Category | Subcategory | LOD | Specificity | Sensitivity | Cost | Time | Description | References |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nucleic acid test | RT-PCR | 1–10 copies | 97.06–99.69% | 91.06–99.96% | USD 25–200 | 4-6 h | The gold standard for SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis is suitable for the large-scale test but needs specialized laboratory equipment and trained technicians | [ | |
| Whole-genome sequencing | ND | ND | 98.33–99.83% | USD 2000 | 48-72 h | The first complete genomic sequences of SARS-CoV-2 were obtained through metatranscriptomics approaches | [ | ||
| Isothermal amplification technology | Transcriptional colorimetric loop-mediated isothermal amplification | 100 copies/μL | 100% | 85% | ND | 21 h | Effectively reduce the false positive rate and improve the detection efficiency | [ | |
| Proofreading enzyme-mediated isothermal amplification | 100 copies | Effectively distinguish SARS-CoV-2 from SARS-CoV | Effectively detect as few as 100 copies of gene N RNA in 1 h | ND | 50 min | Show similar analytical performance with the conventional RT-PCR | [ | ||
| Emulsion loop-mediated isothermal amplification | 10, 103, and 105 copies/μL | ND | ND | ND | 5–10 min | Limit of detection of 1 copy per microliter sample and portable device using a miniature spectrometer or a smartphone | [ | ||
| Recombinase polymerase amplification | Combined RPA with rkDNA-graphene oxide probing system | 6.0 aM | ND | ND | ND | 1.6 h | Exhibit high selectivity and sensitivity for the diagnosis of COVID-19 | [ | |
| Recombinase polymerase amplification | 7.659 copies/μL | 100% | 98% | USD 4.3 | 5–20 min | High specificity | [ | ||
| Isothermal RPA-lateral flow detection | 0.25–2.5 copies/μL | 100% | 94% | ND | 5 min | The detection limit of RPA-LF for SARS-CoV-2 was 35.4 nucleocapsid (N) gene copies/L; the sensitivity was similar to that of qualitative real-time PCR | [ | ||
| Hybrid capture immunofluorescence assay | Hybrid capture immunofluorescence assay | 500 copies per mL | 99% | 100% | ND | 45 min | The detection sensitivity is consistent with similar products on the market; however, this technique can only give qualitative results | [ | |
| Entropy-driven amplified electrochemiluminescence | 2.67 fM | ND | ND | ND | 10–20 h | High selectivity and stability | [ | ||
| CRISPR-based test | Cas12a | 10 copies per μL reaction | 100% | 95% | USD 6 | 40–60 min | Enables rapid, ultrasensitive (few copies), and highly specific nucleic acid detections | [ | |
| Cas13a | 10–100 copies per μL | 100% | 96% | USD 3.5 | 40–57 min | Rapid, sensitive, and with low instrument requirement | [ | ||
| Pyrococcus furiosus Argonaute coupled with modified ligase chain reaction | 10 aM | ND | ND | Cheaper than CRISPR | ~70 min | High sensitivity, high specificity, and multiplexing detection; without the use of RNA as guidance | [ | ||
| Immunological test | Antigen immunological test | Quantum dot immunochromatographic assay | 4.9 pg/mL | 100% | 75 pg/mL | USD 1.5 | 3 min | One single test that can cover hs-CRP and routine-range CRP with a detection range from 1 to 200 μg mL−1 | [ |
| QuickNavi™-COVID-19 Ag immunochromatographic test | ND | 100% | 86.7% | Cheaper than nucleic acid amplification tests | 5 min | The overall sensitivity was 86.7%, and the positive detection rate in patients with CT < 30 was comparable to that of RT-PCR | [ | ||
| Magnetic graphene quantum dots | 248 Particles mL−1 | Related to SARS-CoV-2 antigen protein | No response to MERS-CoV | USD 1.25 | 2 min | Sensitive detection without sample pretreatment in one step with a LOD of 248 Particles mL−1 | [ | ||
| Binax-CoV2 | 1.6 × 104–4.3 × 104 viral RNA copies | 99.9% | 93.3% | USD 5 | 15 min | The sensitivity of Binax-CoV2 was 93.3% and the specificity was 99.9% | [ | ||
| SERS biosensor | 80 copies mL−1 | Related to the sensing environment | Suffers from non-specific binding | More expensive than ELISA | 5 min | The low detection limit (LOD) can be reduced to 80 parts mL−1 | [ | ||
| Interdigitated microelectrode chip | 2.29 × 10−6 ng/mL | 4.27 × 10−4 ng/mL | 234:1 | USD 1 | 20 s | The linear range is 10−5–10−1 ng/mL; the strategy is real-time, sensitive, selective, and large-scale in cold-chain food quarantine | [ | ||
| Serum antibody immunological test | Split luciferase antibody biosensors | ND | > 99% | > 98% | ∼15 ¢ | 5 min | The sensitivity to detect anti-S protein antibodies was 89% and anti-N protein antibodies were 98%, and the specificity of both was more than 99% | [ | |
| Colloidal gold immunochromatography assay | 20.00 IU/mL | 96.2% | 71.1% | ND | 10–15 min | The IgM/IgG test assay demonstrated high sensitivity of 71.1% and specificity of 96.2% in 150 suspect COVID-19 cases | [ | ||
| Chemiluminescence immunoassay | 0.5–1.5 AU/mL | 97.5% | 78.65% | ND | 1 h | The antibody detection rate has high sensitivity, high precision, quantitative detection, and easy automation | [ | ||
| Upconverting phosphor immunochromatography assay | ND | 99.75% | 89.15% | ND | 10 min | High sensitivity, no interference from the background, and good stability | [ | ||
| Surface plasmon resonance biosensors (SPRS) | 0.22 pM | ND | ND | ND | ND | The SPR biosensor is feasible in the concentration range of 2 to 1000 ng/mL | [ | ||
| DNA-assisted nanopore sensing | 50 ng/mL (IgM) 10 ng/mL(IgG) | ND | ND | USD 8 | ND | High sensitivity and specificity compared to laboratory techniques | [ | ||
| Colorimetric-fluorescent dual-mode lateral flow immunoassay biosensor | 10 ng/mL(IgM) 5 ng/mL(IgG) | 100% | ND | ND | ND | The combined detection sensitivity and specificity of this assay for IgM/IgG is 100%, and it has great potential for rapid and accurate detection | [ | ||
| The lateral flow immunoassay method | ND | 90.63% | 88.66% | ND | 15 min | The limits of detection for IgM and IgG were 10 ng/mL and 5 ng/mL, respectively | [ | ||
| Luciferase immunosorbent assay (LISA) | 0.4–75 pg / μl | 100% | 71% | ND | ~60 min | LISA had a sensitivity of 71% in COVID-19 patients and a specificity of 100% in healthy blood donors in the second week after onset | [ | ||
| Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays | 0.095 (IgM) 0.083 (IgG) | ND | 98% | ND | 80–120 min | High sensitivity and specificity | [ | ||
| Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays | ND | 88.2–99.2% (IgM) 75.6–98.3% (IgG) | 78.2% (IgG) 96.6%(IgM) | ND | 1.5 h | ELISA was used to detect IgG antibodies in confirmed patients with COVID-19, and the sensitivity to detect IgM antibodies was low | [ | ||
| Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISA) | ND | 93–100% | 65–85% | ND | 4 h | The detection precision is similar to ELISA, but the detection range is wider and the sensitivity is higher | [ |
Note that ND is not defined in the literature. LOD: limit of detection. RT-PCR(Reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction). CRISPR(Clustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeats), SERS(Surface-enhanced raman scattering). aM: 10−18 mol/mL. fM: 10−15 mol/mL. IU: international unit. AU: arbitrary unit.