Successful Detection of Delta and Omicron Variants of SARS-CoV-2 by Veterinary Diagnostic Laboratory Participants in an Interlaboratory Comparison Exercise.

BACKGROUND: Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, veterinary diagnostic laboratories have tested diagnostic samples for SARS-CoV-2 both in animals and over 6 million human samples. An evaluation of the performance of those laboratories is needed using blinded test samples to ensure that laboratories report reliable data to the public. This interlaboratory comparison exercise (ILC3) builds on 2 prior exercises to assess whether veterinary diagnostic laboratories can detect Delta and Omicron variants spiked in canine nasal matrix or viral transport medium. METHODS: The ILC organizer was an independent laboratory that prepared inactivated Delta variant at levels of 25 to 1000 copies per 50 µL of nasal matrix for blinded analysis. Omicron variant at 1000 copies per 50 µL of transport medium was also included. Feline infectious peritonitis virus (FIPV) RNA was used as a confounder for specificity assessment. Fourteen test samples were prepared for each participant. Participants used their routine diagnostic procedures for RNA extraction and real-time reverse transcriptase-PCR. Results were analyzed according to International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 16140-2:2016. RESULTS: Overall, laboratories demonstrated 93% detection for Delta and 97% for Omicron at 1000 copies per 50 µL. Specificity was 97% for blank samples and 100% for blank samples with FIPV. No differences in Cycle Threshold (Ct) values were significant for samples with the same virus levels between N1 and N2 markers, nor between the 2 variants. CONCLUSIONS: The results indicated that all ILC3 participants were able to detect both Delta and Omicron variants. The canine nasal matrix did not significantly affect SARS-CoV-2 detection.

Interlaboratory Validation of a DNA Metabarcoding Assay for Mammalian and Poultry Species to Detect Food Adulteration.

Meat species authentication in food is most commonly based on the detection of genetic variations. Official food control laboratories frequently apply single and multiplex real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assays and/or DNA arrays. However, in the near future, DNA metabarcoding, the generation of PCR products for DNA barcodes, followed by massively parallel sequencing by next generation sequencing (NGS) technologies, could be an attractive alternative. DNA metabarcoding is superior to well-established methodologies since it allows simultaneous identification of a wide variety of species not only in individual foodstuffs but even in complex mixtures. We have recently published a DNA metabarcoding assay for the identification and differentiation of 15 mammalian species and six poultry species. With the aim to harmonize analytical methods for food authentication across EU Member States, the DNA metabarcoding assay has been tested in an interlaboratory ring trial including 15 laboratories. Each laboratory analyzed 16 anonymously labelled samples (eight samples, two subsamples each), comprising six DNA extract mixtures, one DNA extract from a model sausage, and one DNA extract from maize (negative control). Evaluation of data on repeatability, reproducibility, robustness, and measurement uncertainty indicated that the DNA metabarcoding method is applicable for meat species authentication in routine analysis.

Diagnostic Potential of Exosomal microRNAs in Colorectal Cancer.

Background: Despite the significance of colonoscopy for early diagnosis of colorectal adenocarcinoma (CRC), population-wide screening remains challenging, mainly because of low acceptance rates. Herein, exosomal (exo-miR) and free circulating microRNA (c-miR) may be used as liquid biopsies in CRC to identify individuals at risk. Direct comparison of both compartments has shown inconclusive results, which is why we directly compared a panel of 10 microRNAs in this entity. Methods: Exo-miR and c-miR levels were measured using real-time quantitative PCR after isolation from serum specimens in a cohort of 69 patients. Furthermore, results were compared to established tumor markers CEA and CA 19-9. Results: Direct comparison of exo- and c-miR biopsy results showed significantly higher microRNA levels in the exosomal compartment (p < 0.001). Exo-Let7, exo-miR-16 and exo-miR-23 significantly differed between CRC and healthy controls (all p < 0.05), while no c-miR showed this potential. Sensitivity and specificity can be further enhanced using combinations of multiple exosomal miRNAs. Conclusions: Exosomal microRNA should be considered as a promising biomarker in CRC for future studies. Nonetheless, results may show interference with common comorbidities, which must be taken into account in future studies.

Second round of an interlaboratory comparison of SARS-CoV2 molecular detection assays used by 45 veterinary diagnostic laboratories in the United States.

The COVID-19 pandemic presents a continued public health challenge. Veterinary diagnostic laboratories in the United States use RT-rtPCR for animal testing, and many laboratories are certified for testing human samples; hence, ensuring that laboratories have sensitive and specific SARS-CoV2 testing methods is a critical component of the pandemic response. In 2020, the FDA Veterinary Laboratory Investigation and Response Network (Vet-LIRN) led an interlaboratory comparison (ILC1) to help laboratories evaluate their existing RT-rtPCR methods for detecting SARS-CoV2. All participating laboratories were able to detect the viral RNA spiked in buffer and PrimeStore molecular transport medium (MTM). With ILC2, Vet-LIRN extended ILC1 by evaluating analytical sensitivity and specificity of the methods used by participating laboratories to detect 3 SARS-CoV2 variants (B.1; B.1.1.7 [Alpha]; B.1.351 [Beta]) at various copy levels. We analyzed 57 sets of results from 45 laboratories qualitatively and quantitatively according to the principles of ISO 16140-2:2016. More than 95% of analysts detected the SARS-CoV2 RNA in MTM at ≥500 copies for all 3 variants. In addition, for nucleocapsid markers N1 and N2, 81% and 92% of the analysts detected ≤20 copies in the assays, respectively. The analytical specificity of the evaluated methods was >99%. Participating laboratories were able to assess their current method performance, identify possible limitations, and recognize method strengths as part of a continuous learning environment to support the critical need for the reliable diagnosis of COVID-19 in potentially infected animals and humans.

Interlaboratory comparison of SARS-CoV2 molecular detection assays in use by U.S. veterinary diagnostic laboratories.

The continued search for intermediate hosts and potential reservoirs for SARS-CoV2 makes it clear that animal surveillance is critical in outbreak response and prevention. Real-time RT-PCR assays for SARS-CoV2 detection can easily be adapted to different host species. U.S. veterinary diagnostic laboratories have used the CDC assays or other national reference laboratory methods to test animal samples. However, these methods have only been evaluated using internal validation protocols. To help the laboratories evaluate their SARS-CoV2 test methods, an interlaboratory comparison (ILC) was performed in collaboration with multiple organizations. Forty-four sets of 19 blind-coded RNA samples in Tris-EDTA (TE) buffer or PrimeStore transport medium were shipped to 42 laboratories. Results were analyzed according to the principles of the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 16140-2:2016 standard. Qualitative assessment of PrimeStore samples revealed that, in approximately two-thirds of the laboratories, the limit of detection with a probability of 0.95 (LOD95) for detecting the RNA was ≤20 copies per PCR reaction, close to the theoretical LOD of 3 copies per reaction. This level of sensitivity is not expected in clinical samples because of additional factors, such as sample collection, transport, and extraction of RNA from the clinical matrix. Quantitative assessment of Ct values indicated that reproducibility standard deviations for testing the RNA with assays reported as N1 were slightly lower than those for N2, and they were higher for the RNA in PrimeStore medium than those in TE buffer. Analyst experience and the use of either a singleplex or multiplex PCR also affected the quantitative ILC test results.

Challenging the "gold standard" of colony-forming units - Validation of a multiplex real-time PCR for quantification of viable Campylobacter spp. in meat rinses.

Campylobacter jejuni is the leading bacterial food-borne pathogen in Europe. Despite the accepted limits of cultural detection of the fastidious bacterium, the "gold standard" in food microbiology is still the determination of colony-forming units (CFU). As an alternative, a live/dead differentiating qPCR has been established, using propidium monoazide (PMA) as DNA-intercalating crosslink agent for inactivating DNA from dead, membrane-compromised cells. The PMA treatment was combined with the addition of an internal sample process control (ISPC), i.e. a known number of dead C. sputorum cells to the samples. The ISPC enables i), monitoring the effective reduction of dead cell signal by the light-activated DNA-intercalating dye PMA, and ii), compensation for potential DNA losses during processing. Here, we optimized the method for routine application and performed a full validation of the method according to ISO 16140-2:2016(E) for the quantification of live thermophilic Campylobacter spp. in meat rinses against the classical enumeration method ISO 10272-2:2017. In order to render the method applicable and cost-effective for practical application, the ISPC was lyophilized to be distributable to routine laboratories. In addition, a triplex qPCR was established to simultaneously quantify thermophilic Campylobacter, the ISPC and an internal amplification control (IAC). Its performance was statistically similar to the two duplex qPCRs up to a contamination level of 4.7 log10Campylobacter per ml of meat rinse. The limit of quantification (LOQ) of the alternative method was around 20 genomic equivalents per PCR reaction, i.e. 2.3 log10 live Campylobacter per ml of sample. The alternative method passed a relative trueness study, confirming the robustness against different meat rinses, and displayed sufficient accuracy within the limits set in ISO 16140-2:2016(E). Finally, the method was validated in an interlaboratory ring trial, confirming that the alternative method was fit for purpose with a tendency of improved repeatability and reproducibility compared to the reference method for CFU determination. Campylobacter served as a model organism, challenging CFU as "gold standard" and could help in guidance to the general acceptance of live/dead differentiating qPCR methods for the detection of food-borne pathogens.