Abstract
Quantitative reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR) is regarded as the gold-standard for diagnostic testing. However, the detection of residual viral RNA genome fragments is affecting several percent of recovered patients, which unnecessarily pro-longs quarantines or delays clinical procedures. To minimize the detection of such fragments, we introduced a single modification in the COVID-19 RT-qPCR to distinguish between infectious and non-infectious viral RNA. After validation of the assay using UVC inactivation of infectious virus, we analyzed positive COVID-19 clinical samples from two different countries. We find that after 15 days of the onset of symptoms, the modified RT-qPCR protocol leads to significantly fewer positive diagnoses in persistently positive samples compared to the standard RT-qPCR test, without compromising diagnoses within 5 days of the onset of symptoms. The method may improve test-to-release protocols and expand the tools available for clinical diagnosis.
Importance Molecular tests can be used to detect RNA virus infections. The RT-qPCR test is currently regarded as the gold-standard, but its sensitivity to residual viral RNA genome fragments can lead to “incorrectly-positive” RT-qPCR results. Such results are different from false-positive RT-qPCR results, which can be generated due to in vitro cross-reactivity or contaminations. However, the detection of RNA fragments leads to similar incorrect conclusions about the presence of infectious virus long after a patient has recovered from a viral infection and thus false-positive diagnoses. We here modified a commercial RT-qPCR kit to make it less sensitive to residual viral RNA genome fragments, reducing the likelihood for such results in recovered COVID-19 patients. The method may improve test-to-release protocols, expand the tools available for clinical testing, and help reduce hospital encumbrance.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This study was funded by joint Wellcome Trust and Royal Society grant 206579/Z/17/Z, and grant G107570 from Public Health England.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
The Vilnius Regional Bioethics Committee approved this study with samples from the Vilnius Santaros Klinikos Biobank under number 2021/5-1342-818. The National Accreditation Board for testing and calibration Laboratories (NABL) approved this study under code KDPLP on 22 June 2021.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
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
Corrected spelling author names. Corrected title.
Data Availability
All data produced in the present study are provided as supplemental tables or available upon reasonable request to the authors
