Evaluation of a Quantitative Dual-Target EBV DNA Test on a Fully Automated Molecular Testing System.

The measurement of Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) is key to diagnosing and managing EBV-associated complications in transplant recipients. The performance of the new Conformité Européenne (CE) and Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-cleared quantitative Roche cobas EBV real-time PCR assay was determined by using EDTA-plasma dilution panels and clinical samples that were spiked with either the World Health Organization's EBV international standard or high-titer EBV lambda stock. Correlation with the Abbott Realtime EBV assay was assessed in clinical specimens and conducted at two independent laboratories. An in silico analysis revealed that the dual-target test (EBNA1 and BMRF2) was 100% inclusive for the known diversity of EBV. The overall limit of detection (LoD) was 16.6 IU/mL for genotype 1 (GT1). GT2 LoD was verified at 18.8 IU/mL. The linear ranges were from 1.40 × 101 to 2.30 × 108 IU/mL and from 2.97 × 101 to 9.90 × 107 IU/mL for GT1 and GT2, respectively. Accuracy was confirmed across the linear range (mean difference not exceeding ±0.18 log10). Precision was not influenced by the factors analyzed (standard deviation of 0.02 to 0.17 log10), including the presence of potentially interfering endogenous or exogenous substances. Plasma samples were stable under several conditions (variable time points, storage, and freeze/thaw cycles). In clinical EBV DNA-positive samples, correlation between the cobas EBV test and the comparator was high (n = 126 valid results; R2 = 0.96) with a 0.1 mean log10 titer difference. The cobas EBV test is an accurate, sensitive, specific, and reproducible assay for the detection of EBV DNAemia in plasma. In general, high levels of automation and calibration to the international standard will lead to improvements in the harmonization of quantitative EBV DNA test results across laboratories.

Amplicon size and non-encapsidated DNA fragments define plasma cytomegalovirus DNA loads by automated nucleic acid testing platforms: A marker of viral cytopathology?

Management of cytomegalovirus (CMV) in transplant patients relies on measuring plasma CMV-loads using quantitative nucleic acid testing (QNAT). We prospectively compared the automated Roche-cobas®6800-CMV and Roche-CAP/CTM-CMV with laboratory-developed Basel-CMV-UL54-95bp, and Basel-CMV-UL111a-77bp. Roche-cobas®6800-CMV and Roche-CAP/CTM-CMV were qualitatively concordant in 142/150 cases (95%). In-depth comparison revealed higher CMV-loads of the laboratory-developed assay and correlated with smaller amplicon size. After calibration to the 1.WHO-approved CMV international standard, differences were reduced but remained significant. DNase-I pretreatment significantly reduced CMV-loads for both automated Roche-CAP/CTM-CMV and Roche-cobas®6800-CMV assays, whereby 90% and 95% of samples became undetectable. DNase-I pretreatment also reduced CMV-loads quantified by Basel-CMV-UL54-95bp and Basel-CMV-UL111a-77bp, but remaining detectable in 20% and 35%, respectively. Differences were largest for 110 samples with low-level CMV-DNAemia being detectable but not-quantifiable by Roche-cobas®6800-CMV, whereby the smaller amplicon sizes yielded higher viral loads for concordant positives. We conclude that non-encapsidated fragmented CMV-DNA is the major form of plasma CMV-loads also measured by fully-automated platforms. Amplicons of <150 bp and calibrators are needed for reliable and commutable QNAT-results. We hypothesize that non-encapsidated fragmented CMV-DNA results from lysis of CMV-replicating cells and represent a direct marker of viral cell damage, which contribute to delayed viral load responses despite effective antivirals.

Assessment of the cobas® HBV RNA investigational assay in the setting of nucleoside analog therapy cessation.

HBV RNA is used as a marker of cccDNA transcription and is applicable in the setting of nucleos(t)ide analog (NA) treatment, which suppresses HBV DNA. Traditional assays for quantification of HBV RNA rely on labor-intensive 3'RACE assays targeting the polyA tail. In this study, the high-throughput Roche cobas®HBV RNA investigational assay was assessed on the Roche cobas® 6800 automated platform. Of 969 samples collected for a NA treatment cessation trial, and tested on the cobas assay, 249 were analyzed for sensitivity, reproducibility, sample type applicability, and results were compared to a RACE-based assay. Results of 97 paired serum and plasma samples demonstrated an excellent correlation of 0.98. However, 14.5% of plasma samples yielded detectable (below the limit of quantification) results, when the paired serum was undetectable, and plasma was shown to yield a statistically significant (p < 0.001) greater mean 0.119 log10 copies/ml. Quantification of 152 samples showed good correlation (0.91) between the cobas and RACE assays. The cobas assay demonstrated superior lower limit of quantification, 10 copies/ml, which resulted in detection of 13.2% more samples than the RACE assay. Reproducibility and linear range of the automated assay were also confirmed. The Roche cobas assay for HBV RNA is sensitive and highly recommended.

Comparative analysis of specificity and sensitivity between Cobas 6800 system and SARS-CoV-2 rRT-PCR to detect COVID-19 infection in clinical samples.

Fast and reliable testing for the COVID 19 infection is the need of the hour for the development of effective and reliable tools and assays. However, it is difficult to find the performance relativity among all these tests which are poorly understood. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the two different platforms where we determine the difference of sensitivity and specificity between the fully automated analyzer (Roche Diagnostics Cobas 6800 SARS-CoV-2 test) under FDA Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) and the laboratory designed test (SARS-CoV-2 rRT-PCR) based on the protocol developed by ICMR (Indian Council for Medical Research). The study was conducted for individual samples. We performed our study with two different approaches, first with validation method consisting of 188 samples (2 batches) on cobas 6800 instrument (Roche Molecular Systems, Branchburg, NJ) soon after we received US FDA EUA on 1 June 2021, all these samples were tested earlier with laboratory designed tests on 25th and 26th May 2021. Over all agreement between the two tests is of 88% and the coefficient of agreement between the two testing platform Cohen'sκ coefficient was found to be 0.76 (95% CI, 2.5897-13.4103) suggesting the substantial agreement between the two platforms. However, in some of the cases, both tests have shown a little disagreement. An overall discordance rate between two systems was found 11.1%. The difference may be due to the limit of detection, variation in the sequences of the primer design or may be due to other factors depicting the importance of comparing the two platforms used in the testing for SARS-CoV-2. Second approach includes head to head evaluation which comprises 1631 samples showed overall agreement of 99% and kappa value of 0.98. These results showed that cobas is effective and reliable assay for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Pooled testing for SARS-CoV-2 infection in an automated high-throughput platform.

BACKGROUND: Active detection of SARS-CoV-2 infection through testing is elementary for the control of COVID-19 pandemic. The implementation of large-scale RT-PCR testing has led to a rise in the demand for testing kits whose availability is always a concern. OBJECTIVE: To find out the feasibility of pooled testing in a high-throughput platform. METHODOLOGY: Pooled testing was conducted in Roche cobas 6800 in 2 methods. Firstly, the simple two-stage testing algorithm was conducted for 1410 samples individually and then as pooled samples. Secondly, we evaluated the sensitivity of cobas 6800 for the detection of a single positive sample within a pool of negative samples. RESULTS: Implementing the five-sample Dorfman pooling to test 1410 samples, we identified 42 (2.9%) individual SARS-CoV-2-positive samples and 27 (9.5%) positive pool samples. The pooling strategy precisely identified all the positive samples. All individually negative samples were also accurately determined by pooling. There was 100% sensitivity of detecting positive samples in a pool of negative samples even up to 1:64 dilution. There was a threefold increase in total throughput in one-third of the cost per day. CONCLUSION: A high-throughput platform such as Cobas 6800 can effectively increase the testing capacity by twofold to threefold by adopting the pooled testing strategy for successful management of SARS-CoV-2 and helping in the containment of community transmission.

Clinical Evaluation of the cobas SARS-CoV-2 Test and a Diagnostic Platform Switch during 48 Hours in the Midst of the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Laboratories are currently witnessing extraordinary demand globally for sampling devices, reagents, consumables, and diagnostic instruments needed for timely diagnosis of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. To meet diagnostic needs as the pandemic grows, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recently granted several commercial SARS-CoV-2 tests Emergency Use Authorization (EUA), but manufacturer-independent evaluation data are scarce. We performed the first manufacturer-independent evaluation of the fully automated sample-to-result two-target test cobas 6800 SARS-CoV-2 (cobas) (Roche Molecular Systems, Branchburg, NJ), which received U.S. FDA EUA on 12 March 2020. The comparator was a standardized 3-h SARS-CoV-2 protocol, consisting of RNA extraction using an automated portable instrument, followed by a two-target reverse transcription real-time PCR (RT-PCR), which our laboratory has routinely used since January 2020 [V. M. Corman, O. Landt, M. Kaiser, R. Molenkamp, et al., Euro Surveill 25(3):pii=2000045, 2020, https://doi.org/10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2020.25.3.2000045]. cobas and the comparator showed overall agreement of 98.1% and a kappa value of 0.95 on an in-house validation panel consisting of 217 well-characterized retrospective samples. Immediate prospective head-to-head comparative evaluation followed on 502 samples, and the diagnostic approaches showed overall agreement of 99.6% and a kappa value of 0.98. A good correlation (r2 = 0.96) between cycle threshold values for SARS-CoV-2-specific targets obtained by cobas and the comparator was observed. Our results showed that cobas is a reliable assay for qualitative detection of SARS-CoV-2 in nasopharyngeal swab samples collected in the Universal Transport Medium System (UTM-RT) (Copan, Brescia, Italy). Under the extraordinary circumstances that laboratories are facing worldwide, a safe diagnostic platform switch is feasible in only 48 h and in the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic if carefully planned and executed.

Multicenter Evaluation of Two Next-Generation HIV-1 Quantitation Assays, Aptima Quant Dx and Cobas 6800, in Comparison to the RealTime HIV-1 Reference Assay.

High accuracy and precision at the lower end of quantification are crucial requirements of a modern HIV viral load (VL) assay, since some clinically relevant thresholds are located at 50 and 200 copies/ml. In this study, we compared the performance of two new fully automated HIV-1 VL assays, Aptima HIV-1 Quant Dx and Cobas HIV-1 (Cobas 6800), with the established RealTime m2000 assay. Assay precision and accuracy were evaluated in a retrospective evaluation out of excess plasma material from four HIV-1+ individuals (subtypes B, C, CRF01_AE, and CRF02_AG). Native plasma samples were diluted to nominal concentrations at 50 and 200 copies/ml (according to the RealTime m2000 assay). All dilutions were tested in triplicate in five independent runs over 5 days and in three labs per system. Assay concordance was determined using 1,011 surplus clinical routine samples, as well as selected retrospective longitudinal samples from 7 patients on treatment. The three assays yielded highly concordant results for individual clinical samples (R2 > 0.98; average difference, ≤0.2 log copies/ml) and retrospective longitudinal samples from patients on treatment. The Aptima and RealTime assays showed similar high precision, meeting the 5σ criterion for the majority of samples across all labs and subtypes. The Cobas assay was less precise, missing the 5σ criterion for the majority of samples at low concentrations. In this analysis, results from the Cobas assay appeared less reliable near the clinically relevant cutoff and should be interpreted with more caution in this context. Due to high precision, full automation, and high concordance with the RealTime assay, the Aptima assay represents a good alternative in routine VL monitoring.

Applicability of the cobas 6800 System for Epstein-Barr viral load quantitation using whole-blood specimens.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to evaluate the analytical performance of the cobas 6800 System (Roche Diagnostics) and assess the feasibility of using whole-blood specimens instead of plasma. METHODS: The analytical performance of the cobas EBV test (Roche Diagnostics) was evaluated. Thereafter, 120 clinical samples were collected to compare the cobas EBV test and the artus EBV RG PCR Kit (Qiagen). The results of the cobas EBV test conducted using paired plasma as well as 5× and 10× diluted whole-blood specimens were compared with those of the artus EBV RG PCR Kit performed using whole blood. RESULTS: The precision of the cobas EBV test was acceptable, and its linearity was confirmed to be within the range of 2.85 to 6.89 log IU/mL. Cross-reactivity was not observed. The best qualitative agreement (Cohen κ = 0.733) was observed using 5× diluted whole blood; the best quantitative correlation (Spearman correlation coefficient = 0.6865) was observed using 10× diluted whole blood. CONCLUSIONS: A significant discrepancy was observed in the results obtained from the 2 assays because of the different specimens used. We observed, however, that diluting whole blood before conducting the cobas EBV test effectively resolved polymerase chain reaction inhibition and viscosity issues, leading to an acceptable correlation with the results from the artus EBV RG PCR Kit conducted using whole blood.

Adaptation and validation of a quantitative vanA/vanB DNA screening assay on a high-throughput PCR system.

Vancomycin resistant enterococci (VRE) are a leading cause of ICU-acquired bloodstream infections in Europe. The bacterial load in enteral colonization may be associated with a higher probability of transmission. Here, we aimed to establish a quantitative vanA/vanB DNA real-time PCR assay on a high-throughput system. Limits of detection (LOD), linear range and precision were determined using serial bacterial dilutions. LOD was 46.9 digital copies (dcp)/ml for vanA and 60.8 dcp/ml for vanB. The assay showed excellent linearity between 4.7 × 101 and 3.5 × 105 dcp/ml (vanA) and 6.7 × 102 and 6.7 × 105 dcp/ml (vanB). Sensitivity was 100% for vanA and vanB, with high positive predictive value (PPV) for vanA (100%), but lower PPV for vanB (34.6%) likely due to the presence of vanB DNA positive anerobic bacteria in rectal swabs. Using the assay on enriched VRE broth vanB PPV increased to 87.2%. Quantification revealed median 2.0 × 104 dcp/ml in PCR positive but VRE culture negative samples and median 9.1 × 104 dcp/ml in VRE culture positive patients (maximum: 107 dcp/ml). The automated vanA/B_UTC assay can be used for vanA/vanB detection and quantification in different diagnostic settings and may support future clinical studies assessing the impact of bacterial load on risk of infection and transmission.

Detection and quantification of HBV and HCV in plasma samples by means of different molecular assays: Comparative study.

INTRODUCTION: Viral load is a very useful marker for monitoring patients infected with HBV and HCV. This work compares assays based on transcription-mediated amplification (TMA) and on real-time PCR (RT-PCR) to verify whether they can be interchangeable. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A bicentric study, in which 147 plasma samples from patients infected with HBV and 229 with HCV were analyzed, was carried out. TMA-based assays (Aptima® HBV Quant and Aptima® HCV Quant Dx, employing Panther system (Hologic®)) and RT-PCR (COBAS® AmpliPrep/COBAS® TaqMan® and COBAS® 6800) were used and the degree of concordance between them was calculated. RESULTS: Viral load was detected in both systems in 60 (40.82%) HBV samples (median log viral load: COBAS: 2.51IU/mL (IQR 2.20-3.17), Panther: 2.71IU/mL (IQR 2.21-3.22)) and in 39 (16.96%) HCV samples (median log viral load: COBAS: 3.93IU/mL (IQR 2.24-6.01), Panther: 3.80IU/mL (IQR 1.99-6.14)). The agreement between both systems was κ=0.943 for HBV and κ=0.925 for HCV. Comparison of viral load samples detected by both assays showed a hight correlation for HBV (R2=0.86) and for HCV (R2=0.97). CONCLUSIONS: Both TMA and RT-PCR based assays may be interchangeable for the management of patients infected with HBV and HCV.

Routine breast milk monitoring using automated molecular assay system reduced postnatal CMV infection in preterm infants.

Human cytomegalovirus (CMV) transmitted through breast milk poses fatal risks to preterm infants. However, current molecular assay systems often do not accommodate breast milk samples. In this study, we evaluated the analytical and clinical performance of the measurement procedure of CMV load in breast milk utilizing the Cobas CMV test on the Cobas 6,800 system. This was enabled by incorporating a simple independent sample preparation procedure before the application of samples on the automated assay system. Clinical data from electronic medical records were retrospectively analyzed. Breast milk samples from mothers of preterm infants born before 33 weeks of gestation were screened for CMV using the automated assay system. CMV positivity rates in breast milk and neonatal samples and the CMV transmission rate were calculated. Furthermore, to validate the analytical accuracy of the overall measurement procedure with newly obtained residual breast milk samples, the linearity of the measurement procedure was assessed, and a simplified sample preparation method was validated against a conventional method. The CMV positivity rates in maternal breast milk and neonatal samples were 57.8 and 5.2%, respectively. The CMV transmission rate through breast milk was 7.7%. No significant differences in gestational age or birth weight were found between the CMV-negative and CMV-positive neonates. The linearity of the procedure was observed within a range of 1.87-4.73 log IU/mL. The simplified sample preparation method had an equivalent or even improved CMV detection sensitivity than the conventional method. Incorporating a simple independent sample preparation procedure effectively resolved any potential issues regarding the application of breast milk on the automated assay system. Our approach contributed to reduced vertical transmission of CMV by providing a convenient and reliable method for the monitoring of breast milk CMV positivity for clinicians.

Evaluating the Efficiency of the Cobas 6800 System for BK Virus Detection in Plasma and Urine Samples.

We evaluated the overall performance of the Cobas 6800 BKV test in detecting BK virus (BKV). We examined the imprecision of the Cobas 6800 BKV test and compared the qualitative and quantitative results obtained from the Cobas 6800 BKV test and the Real-Q BKV quantification assay. We assessed 88 plasma and 26 urine samples collected between September and November 2022 from patients with BKV infection using the Real-Q BKV quantitative assay. The lognormal coefficient of variation indicated that the inter-assay precision of the Cobas 6800 BKV test ranged from 13.86 to 33.83%. A strong correlation was observed between the quantitative results obtained using the Cobas 6800 BKV test and the Real-Q BKV quantification assay for plasma samples. The Spearman's rank correlation coefficients (ρ) for plasma, polymerase chain reaction (PCR) media-stabilized urine, and raw urine samples were 0.939, 0.874, and 0.888, respectively. Our analyses suggest that the Cobas 6800 BKV test is suitable for clinical applications owing to the strong correlation between the results obtained using this test and the Real-Q BKV quantification assay in plasma and urine samples. Furthermore, utilizing fresh raw urine samples can be a viable approach for the Cobas 6800 BKV test as it is less labor- and time-intensive.

Comparison of four commercial EBV DNA quantitative tests to a new test at an early stage of development.

BACKGROUND: Regular screening for Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) DNA using quantitative RT-PCR is recommended for early intervention in at-risk patients. Harmonization of quantitative RT-PCR assays is critical to avoid misinterpretation of results. Here, we compare quantitative results of the cobas® EBV assay to four commercial RT-qPCR assays. METHODS: The cobas EBV, EBV R-Gene, artus EBV RG PCR, RealStar EBV PCR kit 2.0 and Abbott EBV RealTime assays were compared for analytic performance using a 10-fold dilution series of EBV reference material, normalized to the WHO standard. For clinical performance, their quantitative results were compared using anonymized, leftover EBV-DNA-positive EDTA plasma samples. RESULTS: For analytic accuracy, the cobas EBV deviated -0.0097 log10 from target values. The other tests showed deviations between 0.0037 and -0.12 log10. For clinical performance, accuracy and linearity of cobas EBV data from both study sites were excellent. Bland-Altman bias and Deming regression analyses showed statistical correlation for cobas EBV to both EBV R-Gene and Abbott RealTime assays but an offset of cobas EBV to artus EBV RG PCR and RealStar EBV PCR kit 2.0. CONCLUSION: The cobas EBV showed the closest correlation to the reference material, followed closely by EBV R-Gene and Abbott EBV RealTime. Values obtained are stated in IU/mL, facilitating comparison across testing sites and potentially improving utilization of guidelines for diagnosis, monitoring, and treatment of patients.

Clinical Performance of Cobas 6800 for the Detection of High-Risk Human Papillomavirus in Urine Samples.

Testing for high-risk human papillomavirus (HPV) as part of primary cervical cancer screening has become more common recently. The Cobas 6800, an FDA-approved cervical screening platform, detects 14 high-risk HPVs, including HPV16 and HPV18. However, this test is limited to only women, which leads to low screening rates in trans men and other non-binary people. The cervical screening of trans men and other genders, especially those lying on the female-to-male spectrum, is equally important. Furthermore, cisgender males, particularly homosexuals, are also prone to chronic HPV infections and serve as HPV carriers, transmitting it to women and other men through sexual contact. Another limitation of the test is its invasive specimen collection, which induces discomfort and genital dysphoria. Therefore, there is a need for an innovative, less invasive method that would allow the sampling process to be more comfortable. In this study, we assess the performance of the Cobas 6800 for high-risk HPV detection in urine samples spiked with HPV16, HPV18, and HPV68. The limit of detection (LOD) was calculated using a dilution series (1.25-10,000 copies/mL) over a course of three days. Furthermore, the clinical validation was performed by calculating sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy. The limit of detection ranged from 50-1000 copies/mL depending upon the genotype. Moreover, the urine test demonstrated a high clinical sensitivity of 93%, 94%, and 90% for HPV16, HPV18, and HPV68, with 100% specificity. The overall percent agreement was calculated to be 95% for both HPV16 and HPV18, and 93% for HPV68. The high concordance, reproducibility, and clinical performance of the current assay suggest that the urine-based HPV test fulfills the requirements for its use in primary cervical screening. Moreover, it has the potential to be used for mass screening to not only identify high-risk individuals, but also to monitor vaccine effectiveness.

Comparison between the analytical sensitivity and clinical performance of two cobas SARS-CoV-2 tests based on high-throughput and point-of-care systems.

Objectives: This study examined analytical sensitivity, specificity, and the clinical performance in detecting SARS-CoV-2 of the Cobas SARS-CoV-2 Test based on the high-throughput Cobas 6800 system and the Cobas SARS-CoV-2 & Flu A/B Test based on the point-of-care cobas Liat system. Methods: The commercial reagents containing SARS-CoV-2 RNA subgenomes were diluted for assessing the sensitivity of the RT-qPCR assay. 385 nasopharyngeal swab specimens taken from contacts of COVID-19 cases were tested for the SARS-CoV-2 detection with both Cobas SARS-CoV-2 Tests. Results: In analytical sensitivity assays, the Cobas SARS-CoV-2 & Flu A/B Test on the Liat system had a lower limit of detection (12.5-25 copies/mL) than the cobas SARS-CoV-2 Test on the cobas 6800 system (25-50 copies/mL). In clinical performance assays, the cobas SARS-CoV-2 Test demonstrated 89.36% (42 out of 47) PPA (positive percent agreement) and 98.82% (334 out of 338) NPA (negative percent agreement) compared to the results of the Cobas SARS-CoV-2 & Flu A/B test. Among five discordant specimens, four had the positive result of the cobas SARS-CoV-2 test, but the negative result of the cobas SARS-CoV-2 & Flu A/B Test. Moreover, these discordant specimens had the Ct values of greater than 33 for the cobas SARS-CoV-2 Test, implying a very small number of virions in the samples. Remarkably, four specimens with a presumptive positive result of the cobas SARS-CoV-2 test had been confirmed by the Cobas SARS-CoV-2 & Flu A/B Test. Next, the scatter plots of the Ct values showed a highly positive correlation between cobas SARS-CoV-2 & Flu A/B Test and the cobas SARS-CoV-2 Test (R-squared value = 0.954-0.962). Conclusions: Both SARS-CoV2 tests of the cobas 6800 and Liat systems produce reliable high throughput and point-of-care assays respectively for the early virus detection and the personal care decision-making during COVID-19 pandemic.

Performance Evaluation of the Aptima Assays in Comparison with the cobas 6800 Assays for the Detection of HIV-1, HBV, and HCV in Clinical Samples.

BACKGROUND: Accurate and consistent viral load (VL) quantitation of HIV type 1 (HIV-1), hepatitis B virus (HBV), and hepatitis C virus (HCV) is important for diagnosis and clinical monitoring. Assay results have to be concordant and compatible across laboratories. We evaluated the performance of three Aptima assays (Hologic, San Diego, CA, USA) and compared their VL values with corresponding cobas 6800 assay (Roche Diagnostics, Mannheim, Germany) results, using 840 clinical samples. METHODS: The correlation between VL results obtained using the two assays was evaluated in terms of analytical sensitivity, precision/reproducibility, linearity, and cross-reactivity. Agreement rates were determined using kappa statistics. The overall agreement of VL values was examined using Passing-Bablok regression analysis. RESULTS: All CVs were within 5%; the assays had good precision for detecting all three viruses. The linearity of quantitation assessed using three AccuSpan linearity panels (Seracare, Milford, MA, USA), was excellent for the Aptima assays. For HIV-1 and HCV, the results of both assays showed excellent agreement (κ=0.89 and 0.90, respectively) while for HBV, the results showed good agreement (κ=0.69). For analytical sensitivity, the VLs required for a 100% detection rate of HIV-1, HBV, and HCV were 20 copies/mL, 7.5 IU/mL, and 5.0 IU/mL, respectively. The results for HIV-1, HBV, and HCV obtained using both assays correlated strongly (R2=0.97, 0.93, and 0.95, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: The cobas 6800 and Aptima assays, with fully automated and high-throughput molecular platforms for HIV-1, HBV, and HCV VL measurements, show good analytical performance and a strong correlation between results. The study results suggest that the assays can be used interchangeably for long-term monitoring of chronic infections.

Clinical evaluation of a fully automated, laboratory-developed multiplex RT-PCR assay integrating dual-target SARS-CoV-2 and influenza A/B detection on a high-throughput platform.

Introduction. Laboratories worldwide are facing high demand for molecular testing during the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic, which might be further aggravated by the upcoming influenza season in the northern hemisphere.Gap Statement. Given that the symptoms of influenza are largely indistinguishable from those of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), both SARS-CoV-2 and the influenza viruses require concurrent testing by RT-PCR in patients presenting with symptoms of respiratory tract infection.Aim. We adapted and evaluated a laboratory-developed multiplex RT-PCR assay for simultaneous detection of SARS-CoV-2 (dual target), influenza A and influenza B (SC2/InflA/InflB-UCT) on a fully automated high-throughput system (cobas6800).Methodology. Analytical performance was assessed by serial dilution of quantified reference material and cell culture stocks in transport medium, including pretreatment for chemical inactivation. For clinical evaluation, residual portions of 164 predetermined patient samples containing SARS-CoV-2 (n=52), influenza A (n=43) or influenza B (n=19), as well as a set of negative samples, were subjected to the novel multiplex assay.Results. The assay demonstrated comparable analytical performance to currently available commercial tests, with limits of detection of 94.9 cp ml-1 for SARS-CoV-2, 14.6 cp ml-1 for influenza A and 422.3 cp ml-1 for influenza B. Clinical evaluation showed excellent agreement with the comparator assays (sensitivity of 98.1, 97.7 and 100 % for Sars-CoV-2 and influenza A and B, respectively).Conclusion. The SC2/InflA/InflB-UCT allows for efficient high-throughput testing for all three pathogens and thus provides streamlined diagnostics while conserving resources during the influenza season.

Automated molecular testing of saliva for SARS-CoV-2 detection.

With surging global demand for SARS-CoV-2 testing capacity, laboratories seek automated, high-throughput molecular solutions, particularly for specimens not requiring specialized collection devices or viral transport media. Saliva specimens submitted from patients under investigation for COVID-19 from March to July 2020 were processed in the laboratory with sterile phosphate-buffered saline in a 1:2 dilution and tested using manual extraction and a commercial assay for detection of the SARS-CoV-2 E gene (LightMix®) in comparison to the Roche cobas® SARS-CoV-2 Test on the cobas® 6800 instrument. 34.4% (22/64) of saliva samples were positive for SARS-CoV-2. Positive and negative concordance between the LightMix® and cobas® assays were 100%. The overall invalid rate for saliva on the cobas® 6800 (1/128, 0.78%) was similar to the baseline invalid rate observed for nasopharyngeal swabs/viral transport media. Saliva is a feasible specimen type for SARS-CoV-2 testing on the cobas® 6800 platform, with potential to improve turnaround time and enhance testing capacity.

Clinical establishment of a laboratory developed quantitative HDV PCR assay on the cobas6800 high-throughput system.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Currently available HDV PCR assays are characterized by considerable run-to-run and inter-laboratory variability. Hence, we established a quantitative reverse transcription real-time PCR (RT-qPCR) assay on the open channel of a fully automated PCR platform (cobas6800, Roche) offering improved consistency and reliability. METHODS: A primer/probe-set targeting a highly conserved region upstream of the HDV antigen was adapted for use on the cobas6800. The lower limit of detection (LLOD) was determined using a dilution panel of the HDV WHO standard (n = 21/dilution). Linearity and inclusivity were tested by preparing 10-fold dilution series of cell culture-derived virus (genotype [GT]1-8; n = 5/dilution). Patient samples containing a variety of bloodborne viral pathogens were tested to confirm exclusivity (n = 60). RESULTS: The LLOD of the HDV utility-channel (HDV_UTC) assay was determined as 3.86 IU/ml (95% CI 2.95-5.05 IU/ml) with a linear range from 10-10ˆ8 IU/ml (GT1). Linear relationships were observed for all HDV GTs with slopes ranging from -3.481 to -4.134 cycles/log and R2 from 0.918 to 0.994. Inter-run and intra-run variability were 0.3 and 0.6 Ct (3xLLOD), respectively. No false-positive results were observed. To evaluate clinical performance, 110 serum samples of anti-HDV-Ab+ patients were analyzed using the HDV_UTC and CE-IVD RoboGene assays. 58/110 and 49/110 samples were concordant positive or negative, respectively (overall agreement 97.3%). Quantitative comparison demonstrated a strong correlation (R2 0.8733; 95% CI 0.8914-0.9609; p value <0.0001). CONCLUSION: The use of highly automated, sample-to-result solutions for molecular diagnostics holds many inherent benefits over manual workflows, including improved reliability, reproducibility and dynamic scaling of testing capacity. The assay we established showed excellent analytical and clinical performance, with inclusivity for all HDV GTs and a limit of quantification of 10 IU/ml, making it a sensitive new tool for HDV screening and viral load monitoring. LAY SUMMARY: The hepatitis delta virus (HDV) causes a severe form of inflammation in the liver. We developed a tool for molecular diagnostics, a polymerase chain reaction HDV assay that showed great performance. It can be used to improve diagnosis of HDV, as well as for monitoring treatment responses. The assay allows for quantification of the virus in the tested samples and is performed on a fully automated platform (cobas6800), which provides various benefits including less hands-on time and excellent comparability of test results.

Multicenter comparison of the Cobas 6800 system with the RealStar RT-PCR kit for the detection of SARS-CoV-2.

BACKGROUND: RT-PCR testing is crucial in the diagnostic of SARS-CoV-2 infection. The use of reliable and comparable PCR assays is a cornerstone to allow use of different PCR assays depending on the local equipment. In this work, we provide a comparison of the Cobas® (Roche) and the RealStar® assay (Altona). METHODS: Assessment of the two assays was performed prospectively in three reference Parisians hospitals, using 170 clinical samples. They were tested with the Cobas® assay, selected to obtain a distribution of cycle threshold (Ct) as large as possible, and tested with the RealStar assay with three largely available extraction platforms: QIAsymphony (Qiagen), MagNAPure (Roche) and NucliSENS-easyMag (BioMérieux). RESULTS: Overall, the agreement (positive for at least one gene) was 76 %. This rate differed considerably depending on the Cobas Ct values for gene E: below 35 (n = 91), the concordance was 99 %. Regarding the positive Ct values, linear regression analysis showed a coefficient of determination (R2) of 0.88 and the Deming regression line revealed a strong correlation with a slope of 1.023 and an intercept of -3.9. Bland-Altman analysis showed that the mean difference (Cobas® minus RealStar®) was + 3.3 Ct, with a SD of + 2.3 Ct. CONCLUSIONS: In this comparison, both RealStar® and Cobas® assays provided comparable qualitative results and a high correlation when both tests were positive. Discrepancies exist after 35 Ct and varied depending on the extraction system used for the RealStar® assay, probably due to a low viral load close to the detection limit of both assays.