Prospective, clinical comparison of self-collected throat-bilateral nares swabs and saline gargle compared to health care provider collected nasopharyngeal swabs among symptomatic outpatients with potential SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Background: In British Columbia (BC), self-collected saline gargle (SG) is the only alternative to health care provider (HCP)-collected nasopharyngeal (NP) swabs to detect SARS-CoV-2 in an outpatient setting by polymerase chain reaction (PCR). However, some individuals cannot perform a SG. Our study aimed to assess combined throat-bilateral nares (TN) swabbing as a swab-based alternative. Methods: Symptomatic individuals greater than 12 years of age seeking a COVID-19 PCR test at one of two COVID-19 collection centres in Metro Vancouver were asked to participate in this study. Participants provided a HCP-collected NP sample and a self-collected SG and TN sample for PCR testing, which were either HCP observed or unobserved. Results: Three-hundred and eleven individuals underwent all three collections. Compared against HCP-NP, SG was 99% sensitive and 98% specific (kappa 0.97) and TN was 99% sensitive and 99% specific (kappa 0.98). Using the final clinical test interpretation as the reference standard, NP was 98% sensitive and 100% specific (kappa 0.98), and both SG and TN were 99% sensitive and 100% specific (both kappa 0.99). Mean cycle threshold values for each viral target were higher in SG specimens compared to the other sample types; however, this did not significantly impact the clinical performance, because the positivity rates were similar. The clinical performance of all specimen types was comparable within the first 7 days of symptom onset, regardless of the observation method. SG self-collections were rated the most acceptable, followed by TN. Conclusions: TN provides another less invasive self-collection modality for symptomatic outpatient SARS-CoV-2 PCR testing.

Historique: En Colombie-Britannique (C.-B.), l'autoprélèvement de gargarisme d'eau saline (GS) est la seule alternative aux écouvillons nasopharyngés (NP) prélevés par un professionnel de la santé (PdS) pour déceler le SRAS-CoV-2 par test PCR en milieu ambulatoire. Cependant, certaines personnes ne peuvent pas effectuer de GS. La présente étude visait évaluer l'écouvillonnage de la gorge et des deux narines (GN) pour remplacer le GS. Méthodologie: Les personnes symptomatiques de plus de 12 ans qui demandaient un test PCR de la COVID-19 à l'un des deux centres de dépistage de la COVID-19 du Grand Vancouver ont été invitées à participer à la présente étude. Les participants ont fourni un prélèvement NP recueilli par un PdS ainsi qu'un autoprélèvement de GS et GN en vue d'un test PCR, observés ou non par un PdS. Résultats: Au total, 311 personnes ont participé aux trois prélèvements. Par rapport au prélèvement NP-PdS, le GS avait une sensibilité de 99 % et une spécificité de 98 % (kappa 0,97) et le prélèvement GN, une sensibilité de 99 % et une spécificité de 99 % (kappa 0, 98). À l'aide de l'interprétation définitive du test clinique comme norme de référence, le prélèvement NP avait une sensibilité de 98 % et une spécificité de 100 % (kappa 0,98) et tant le GS que le prélèvement GN avaient une sensibilité de 99 % et une spécificité de 100 % (deux kappa 0,99). Les valeurs seuils du cycle moyen de chaque cible virale étaient plus élevées dans les échantillons de GS quand dans les autres types d'échantillons, mais n'avaient pas d'effet significatif sur le rendement clinique, puisque les taux de positivité étaient semblables. Le rendement clinique de tous les types d'échantillons était comparable dans les sept premiers jours suivant l'apparition de la maladie, quel que soit le mode d'observation. L'autoprélèvement de GS a été classé comme le plus acceptable, suivi du prélèvement GN. Conclusions: Le prélèvement GN est un autre mode d'autoprélèvement moins invasif chez les patients ambulatoires symptomatiques qui effectuent un test PCR du SRAS-CoV-2.

Development and validation of a real-time, reverse transcription PCR assay for rapid and low-cost genotyping of hepatitis C virus genotypes 1a, 1b, 2, and 3a.

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection affects millions of people and leads to liver fibrosis, cirrhosis, and hepatocellular carcinoma. Treatment regimen selection requires HCV genotype (Gt) and Gt 1 subtype determination. Use of a laboratory developed, reverse transcription (RT)-PCR assay was explored as a low-cost, high-throughput screening approach for the major HCV genotypes and subtypes in North America. A commercial line probe assay (LiPA) was used for comparison. Sequencing and/or an alternative PCR assay were used for discordant analyses. Testing of 155 clinical samples revealed that a paired, duplex real-time RT-PCR assay that targets Gts 1a and 3a in one reaction and Gts 1b and 2 in another had 95% overall sensitivity and individual Gt sensitivity and specificity of 98-100% and 85-98%, respectively. The RT-PCR assay detected mixed HCV Gts in clinical and spiked samples and no false-positive reactions occurred with rare Gts 3b, 4, 5, or 6. Implementation of the RT-PCR assay, with some reflex LiPA testing, would cost only a small portion of the cost of using LiPA alone, and can also save 1.5h of hands-on time. The use of a laboratory developed RT-PCR assay for HCV genotyping has the potential to reduce cost and labour burdens in high-volume testing settings.

Evaluation of the core antigen assay as a second-line supplemental test for diagnosis of active hepatitis C virus infection.

The British Columbia Center for Disease Control laboratory performs approximately 95% of all hepatitis C virus (HCV) antibody tests for the province's 4 million inhabitants. In 2002, the laboratory tested 96,000 specimens for anti-HCV antibodies, of which 4,800 (5%) were seroreactive and required confirmation of active infection. Although HCV RNA assays with a sensitivity of 50 IU/ml or less are recommended for the confirmation of active HCV infection, given the large number of seroreactive specimens tested annually, we evaluated the Ortho trak-C assay (OTCA) as a second-line confirmatory test and determined its limit of detection (LoD). Of 502 specimens from treatment-naïve anti-HCV-positive individuals, 478 had sufficient volumes for evaluation by the OTCA and HCV RNA tests. Core antigen was not detected in 147 of 478 (30.8%) of these specimens, of which 37 of 147 (25.2%) were shown to be viremic by the VERSANT HCV (version 3.0) (branched-DNA) assay and/or the VERSANT HCV qualitative assay. Testing of 144 replicates of a World Health Organization standard dilution series indicated that the LoD of OTCA was approximately 27,000 IU/ml. This LoD is consistent with the inability of OTCA to detect core antigen in clinical specimens with low viral loads. We conclude that OTCA has limited value as a confirmatory test for the diagnosis of active HCV infection because 37 of 367 (10%) of viremic specimens had undetectable core antigen. Qualitative HCV RNA testing remains the present standard for the confirmation of active HCV infection in the diagnostic setting.