Abstract
Shortage of reagents and consumables required for the extraction and molecular detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA in respiratory samples has led many laboratories to investigate alternative approaches for sample preparation. Fomsgaard et al 20205 recently presented results using heat-processing of respiratory samples prior to RT-qPCR as an economical method enabling an extremely fast streamlining of the processes at virtually no cost.
Here, we present our results using this method and highlight some major pitfalls that diagnostics laboratories should be aware of before proceeding with this technique. We first investigated various treatments using different temperatures, incubation times and sample volumes based on the above study to optimise the heat-treatment conditions. Although the initial data confirmed the published results, further investigations revealed unexpected inhibitory properties of some commonly used virus transport media (VTMs) on some commercially available RT-qPCR mixes, emphasising the critical importance of a thorough validation process to determine the most adapted reagents to be used depending on the sample types to be tested.
In conclusion, although the method works, with very consistent Ct values and an excellent sensitivity when compared to a conventional RNA extraction method, it is critical to include an internal control to check each sample for potential inhibition.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
None
Author Declarations
All relevant ethical guidelines have been followed; any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained and details of the IRB/oversight body are included in the manuscript.
Yes
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
Conflict of interest: None
Funding statement: none
Data Availability
All the experiments and results presented here were performed at Micropathology Ltd.
