ABSTRACT
The emergence of a new coronavirus in Wuhan China has triggered a global need for accurate diagnostic assays. Initially, mostly laboratory developed molecular tests were available but shortly thereafter different commercial assays started to appear and are still increasing in number. Although independent performance evaluations are ongoing, available data is still scarce. Here we provide a direct comparison of key performance characteristics of 13 commercial RT-PCR assays. Thirteen RT-PCR assays were selected based on the criteria that they can be used following generic RNA extraction protocols, on common PCR platforms and availability. Using a 10-fold and 2-fold dilution series of a quantified SARS-CoV-2 cell-cultured virus stock, performance was assessed compared to our in house validated assay. Specificity was tested by using RNA extracted from cultured common human coronaviruses. All RT-PCR kits included in this study exhibited PCR efficiencies > 90%, except for the Sentinel Diagnostics B E-gene RUO assay (80%). Analytical sensitivity varied between 3.3 RNA copies to 330 RNA copies. Only one assay cross reacted with another human coronavirus (MERS). This study provides a technical baseline of 13 different commercial PCR assays for SARS-CoV-2 detection that can be used by laboratories interested in purchasing any of these for further full clinical validation.
Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus/isolation & purification , Clinical Laboratory Techniques/methods , Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Molecular Diagnostic Techniques/methods , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis , RNA, Viral/analysis , Reverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction/methods , Betacoronavirus/genetics , COVID-19 , COVID-19 Testing , Cross Reactions , Humans , Pandemics , RNA, Viral/genetics , SARS-CoV-2 , Sensitivity and SpecificityABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: In acute cough patients, impaired lung function as present in chronic lung conditions like asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) are often thought to negatively influence course of disease, but clear evidence is lacking. AIMS: To investigate the influence of lung function abnormalities on course of disease and response to antibiotic therapy in primary care patients with acute cough. METHODS: A total of 3,104 patients with acute cough (⩽28 days) were included in a prospective observational study with a within-nested trial, of which 2,427 underwent spirometry 28-35 days after inclusion. Influence of the lung function abnormalities fixed obstruction (forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1)/forced vital capacity (FVC) ratio <0.7) and bronchodilator responsiveness (FEV1 increase of ⩾12% or 200 ml after 400 µg salbutamol) on symptom severity, duration and worsening were evaluated using uni- and multivariable regression models. Antibiotic use was defined as the reported use of antibiotics ⩾5 days in the first week. Interaction terms were calculated to investigate modifying effects of lung function on antibiotic effect. RESULTS: The only significant association was the effect of severe airway obstruction on symptom severity on days 2-4 (difference=0.31, 95% confidence interval (CI)=0.03-0.60, P=0.03). No evidence of a differential effect of lung function on the effect of antibiotics was found. Prior use of inhaled steroids was associated with a 30% slower resolution of symptoms rated 'moderately bad' or worse (hazard ratio=0.75, 95% CI=0.63-0.90, P=0.00). CONCLUSIONS: In adult patients with acute cough, lung function abnormalities were neither significantly associated with course of disease nor did they modify the effect of antibiotics.
