Diagnosis with Metagenomic Next-Generation Sequencing (mNGS) technology and real-time PCR for SARS-CoV-2 Omicron detection using various nasopharyngeal swabs in SARS-CoV-2 Omicron

被引:0
|
作者
Li, Sujuan [1 ]
Zhang, Yuanhang [1 ]
Tong, Pengcheng [1 ]
Yang, Wei [1 ]
机构
[1] Zhejiang Chinese Med Univ, Hangzhou Tradit Chinese Med Hosp, Dept Clin Lab, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, Peoples R China
来源
PLOS ONE | 2024年 / 19卷 / 08期
关键词
D O I
10.1371/journal.pone.0305289
中图分类号
O [数理科学和化学]; P [天文学、地球科学]; Q [生物科学]; N [自然科学总论];
学科分类号
07 ; 0710 ; 09 ;
摘要
Background The SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant, with the main subtypes BA.5.2 and BF.7 in China, led to off-target effects on the S and N genes from December 1, 2022, to January 31, 2023. The kits used for studying and developing these agents were not adequately and independently evaluated. It is important to verify the performance of commercial Real-Time quantitative PCR (RT-qPCR) tests.Objective We conducted a clinical evaluation of two Real Time SARS-CoV-2 Omicron assays to verify their performance using various detection reagents and clinical specimens.Methods We performed clinical evaluations of two existing Chinese SARS-CoV-2 Omicron RT-qPCR kits 2019-nCoV nucleic acid diagnostic kits (Fosun Biotechnology, National instrument registration 20203400299, Shanghai, China) and COVID-19 nucleic acid detection kits (eDiagnosis Biomedicine, National instrument registration 20203400212, Wuhan, China) and using BSD (Bondson) (Guangzhou Bondson Biotechnology Co. Ltd, batch number 2022101), quality controls provided by the inspection center and a large number of clinically confirmed specimens.Results The concordance rates for the Fosun and eDiagnosis kits were 95% and 100%, respectively. The detection limit for the Fosun and eDiagnosis kits was verified to be 300 copies/mL and 500 copies/mL. The Fosun assay exhibited the largest coefficient of variation (CV) for ORF1ab and N gene at the detection limit concentration (4.80%, 3.49%), whereas eDiagnosis showed a smaller CV (0.93%, 1.10%). In the reference product from the Hangzhou Clinical Laboratory Center test, it was found that Fosun had the lowest sensitivity of 93.47% and a specificity of 100%, while eDiagnosis exhibited 100% for both sensitivity and specificity. The lowest single target gene detection rate of Fosun reagents was 68.7% for the ORF1ab gene and 87.5% for the N gene, while eDiagnosis detection rate was 100%. Among the clinical group S specimens, the missed detection rate of the Fosun reagent was 10.9%, which was higher than the 3.9% of eDiagnosis. However, there was no significant difference in the clinical diagnostic efficiency of the two reagents.Conclusions The ORF1ab and N assays of SARS-CoV-2 Omicron on the eDiagnosis platform yielded higher values compared to those on the Fosun platform. Consequently, the eDiagnosis kit has also been used as standard detection reagents. Considering that the Fosun reagent has a relatively low detection limit and targets three single genes, it is more advantageous as a confirmatory reagent for the new museum.
引用
收藏
页数:16
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Omicron variant in the current SARS-CoV-2 pandemic
    Nasiri, Kaveh
    Dimitrova, Aleksandra
    JOURNAL OF DENTAL SCIENCES, 2022, 17 (02) : 1041 - 1042
  • [32] Is Omicron the last SARS-CoV-2 Variant of Concern?
    Rahimi, Farid
    Abadi, Amin Talebi Bezmin
    ARCHIVES OF MEDICAL RESEARCH, 2022, 53 (03) : 336 - 338
  • [33] Immune Evasion of SARS-CoV-2 Omicron Subvariants
    Ke, Hanzhong
    Chang, Matthew R.
    Marasco, Wayne A.
    VACCINES, 2022, 10 (09)
  • [34] Omicron: A highly transmissible SARS-CoV-2 variant
    Rahimi, Farid
    Abadi, Amin Talebi Bezmin
    GENE REPORTS, 2022, 27
  • [35] Modeling transmission of SARS-CoV-2 Omicron in China
    Cai, Jun
    Deng, Xiaowei
    Yang, Juan
    Sun, Kaiyuan
    Liu, Hengcong
    Chen, Zhiyuan
    Peng, Cheng
    Chen, Xinhua
    Wu, Qianhui
    Zou, Junyi
    Sun, Ruijia
    Zheng, Wen
    Zhao, Zeyao
    Lu, Wanying
    Liang, Yuxia
    Zhou, Xiaoyu
    Ajelli, Marco
    Yu, Hongjie
    NATURE MEDICINE, 2022, 28 (07) : 1468 - +
  • [36] Structural diversity of the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron spike
    Gobeil, Sophie M-C
    Henderson, Rory
    Stalls, Victoria
    Janowska, Katarzyna
    Huang, Xiao
    May, Aaron
    Speakman, Micah
    Beaudoin, Esther
    Manne, Kartik
    Li, Dapeng
    Parks, Rob
    Barr, Maggie
    Deyton, Margaret
    Martin, Mitchell
    Mansouri, Katayoun
    Edwards, Robert J.
    Eaton, Amanda
    Montefiori, David C.
    Sempowski, Gregory D.
    Saunders, Kevin O.
    Wiehe, Kevin
    Williams, Wilton
    Korber, Bette
    Haynes, Barton F.
    Acharya, Priyamvada
    MOLECULAR CELL, 2022, 82 (11) : 2050 - +
  • [37] SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant: Characteristics and prevention
    He, Xuemei
    Hong, Weiqi
    Pan, Xiangyu
    Lu, Guangwen
    Wei, Xiawei
    MEDCOMM, 2021, 2 (04): : 838 - 845
  • [38] Omicron: A highly transmissible SARS-CoV-2 variant
    Rahimi, Farid
    Abadi, Amin Talebi Bezmin
    GENE REPORTS, 2022, 27
  • [39] Audio Interview: The Omicron Variant of SARS-CoV-2
    Rubin, Eric J.
    Baden, Lindsey R.
    Karim, Salim S. Abdool
    Morrissey, Stephen
    NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 2021, 385 (23): : E96 - E96
  • [40] Is the Omicron variant of SARS-CoV-2 coming to an end?
    Zhao, Yingjie
    Huang, Jianping
    Zhang, Li
    Lian, Xinbo
    Wang, Danfeng
    INNOVATION, 2022, 3 (03):