RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Highly accurate and sensitive diagnostic detection of SARS-CoV-2 by digital PCR
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2020.03.14.20036129
DO 10.1101/2020.03.14.20036129
A1 Dong, Lianhua
A1 Zhou, Junbo
A1 Niu, Chunyan
A1 Wang, Quanyi
A1 Pan, Yang
A1 Wang, Xia
A1 Zhang, Yongzhuo
A1 Yang, Jiayi
A1 Liu, Manqing
A1 Zhao, Yang
A1 Peng, Tao
A1 Xie, Jie
A1 Gao, Yunhua
A1 Wang, Di
A1 Zhao, Yun
A1 Dai, Xinhua
A1 Fang, Xiang
YR 2020
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/03/18/2020.03.14.20036129.abstract
AB Background The outbreak of COVID-19 caused by a novel Coronavirus (termed SARS-CoV-2) has spread to over 120 countries around the world. Currently, real-time qPCR (RT-qPCR) is used as the gold standard for diagnostics of SARS-CoV-2. However, the positive rate of RT-qPCR assay of pharyngeal swab samples is reported to be 30∼60%. More accurate and sensitive methods are urgently needed.Method We established a digital PCR (dPCR) protocol to detect SARS-CoV-2 on 194 clinical pharyngeal swab samples, including 103 suspected patients, 75 close contacts and 16 supposed convalescents.Results The limit of blanks (LoBs) of the dPCR assays are about 1.6, 1.6 and 0.8 copies/reaction for ORF 1ab, N and E gene. The limit of detection (LoD) is 2 copies/reaction. The overall accuracy of ddPCR is 95.5 %. For the fever suspected patients, the accuracy of SARS-CoV-2 detection was significantly improved from 28.2% to 87.4% by dPCR. For close contacts, the suspect rate was greatly decreased from 21% down to 1%. In addition, quantification of the virus load for convalescents by dPCR showed that a longer observation in the hospital is needed for aged patients. Conclusion: dPCR could be a confirmatory method for suspected patients diagnosed by RT-qPCR. Furthermore, dPCR is more sensitive and suitable for low virus load specimens from the both patients under isolation and those under observation who may not be exhibiting clinical symptoms.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Clinical TrialData collection of cases and close contacts were determined by the National Health Commission of the People’s Republic of China to be part of a continuing public health outbreak investigation and were thus considered exempt from institutional review board approval. The analysis was performed on existing samples collected during standard diagnostic tests, posing no extra burden to patients.Funding StatementFundamental Research Funds for Central Public welfare Scientific research Institutes sponsored by National Institute of Metrology, P.R. China (31-ZYZJ2001/AKYYJ2009)Author DeclarationsAll 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.YesAll necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI 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).YesI 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.YesAll relevant data are available upon request.