3 research outputs found

    A highly effective reverse-transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) assay for the rapid detection of SARS-CoV-2 infection

    No full text
    The COVID-19 pandemic has illustrated the importance of simple, rapid and accurate diagnostic testing. This study describes the validation of a new rapid SARS-CoV-2 RT-LAMP assay for use on extracted RNA or directly from swab offering an alternative diagnostic pathway that does not rely on traditional reagents that are often in short supply during a pandemic. Analytical specificity (ASp) of this new RT-LAMP assay was 100% and analytical sensitivity (ASe) was between 1 × 101 and 1 × 102 copies per reaction when using a synthetic DNA target. The overall diagnostic sensitivity (DSe) and specificity (DSp) of RNA RT-LAMP was 97% and 99% respectively, relative to the standard of care rRT-PCR. When a CT cut-off of 33 was employed, above which increasingly evidence suggests there is a low risk of patients shedding infectious virus, the diagnostic sensitivity was 100%. The DSe and DSp of Direct RT-LAMP (that does not require RNA extraction) was 67% and 97%, respectively. When setting CT cut-offs of ≤33 and ≤25, the DSe increased to 75% and 100%, respectively, time from swab-to-result, CT < 25, was < 15 min. We propose that RNA RT-LAMP could replace rRT-PCR where there is a need for increased sample throughput and Direct RT-LAMP as a near-patient screening tool to rapidly identify highly contagious individuals within emergency departments and care homes during times of increased disease prevalence ensuring negative results still get laboratory confirmation.</p

    RT-LAMP has high accuracy for detecting SARS-CoV-2 in saliva and naso/oropharyngeal swabs from asymptomatic and symptomatic individuals

    No full text
    Objectives: To validate an improved sample preparation method for extraction free Direct RT-LAMP and define the clinical performance of four different RT-LAMP assay formats for detection of SARS-CoV-2 with a multisite clinical evaluation.Method: We describe Direct RT-LAMP on 559 swabs and 86,760 saliva samples and RNA RT-LAMP on extracted RNA from 12,619 swabs and 12,521 saliva samples collected from asymptomatic and symptomatic individuals across multiple healthcare and community settings.Results: For Direct RT-LAMP, we found a diagnostic sensitivity (DSe) of 70.35% (95% CI 63.48-76.60%) on swabs and 84.62% (79.50-88.88%) on saliva, with diagnostic specificity (DSp) of 100% (98.98-100.00%) on swabs and 100% (99.72-100.00%) on saliva when compared to RT-qPCR. Analysing samples with RT-qPCR ORF1ab CT values of≤25 and ≤33 (high and medium-high viral copy number, respectively), we found DSe of 100% (96.34-100%) and 77.78% (70.99-83.62%) for swabs, and 99.01% (94.61-99.97%) and 87.32% (80.71-92.31%) for saliva. For RNA RT-LAMP DSe and DSp were 95.98% (92.74-98.06%) and 99.99% (99.95-100%) for swabs, and 80.65% (73.54-86.54%) and 99.99% (99.95-100%) for saliva, respectively.Conclusions: The findings from these evaluations demonstrate that RT-LAMP testing of swabs and saliva is applicable to a variety of different use-cases, including frequent, interval-based testing of saliva from asymptomatic individuals via Direct RT-LAMP that may otherwise be missed using symptomatic testing alone.<br/

    Reverse-Transcriptase Loop-Mediated Isothermal Amplification Has High Accuracy for Detecting Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 in Saliva and Nasopharyngeal/Oropharyngeal Swabs from Asymptomatic and Symptomatic Individuals.

    No full text
    Previous studies have described reverse-transcriptase loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) method for the rapid detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in nasopharyngeal and oropharyngeal swab and saliva samples. This study describes the validation of an improved sample preparation method for extraction-free RT-LAMP and defines the clinical performance of four different RT-LAMP assay formats for detection of SARS-CoV-2 within a multisite clinical evaluation. Direct RT-LAMP was performed on 559 swabs and 86,760 saliva samples and RNA RT-LAMP on extracted RNA from 12,619 swabs and 12,521 saliva samples from asymptomatic and symptomatic individuals across health care and community settings. For direct RT-LAMP, overall diagnostic sensitivity (DSe) of 70.35% (95% CI, 63.48%-76.60%) on swabs and 84.62% (95% CI, 79.50%-88.88%) on saliva was observed, with diagnostic specificity of 100% (95% CI, 98.98%-100.00%) on swabs and 100% (95% CI, 99.72%-100.00%) on saliva when compared with RT-qPCR; analyzing samples with RT-qPCR ORF1ab C values of ≤25 and ≤33, DSe values of 100% (95% CI, 96.34%-100%) and 77.78% (95% CI, 70.99%-83.62%) for swabs were observed, and 99.01% (95% CI, 94.61%-99.97%) and 87.61% (95% CI, 82.69%-91.54%) for saliva, respectively. For RNA RT-LAMP, overall DSe and diagnostic specificity were 96.06% (95% CI, 92.88%-98.12%) and 99.99% (95% CI, 99.95%-100%) for swabs, and 80.65% (95% CI, 73.54%-86.54%) and 99.99% (95% CI, 99.95%-100%) for saliva, respectively. These findings demonstrate that RT-LAMP is applicable to a variety of use cases, including frequent, interval-based testing of saliva with direct RT-LAMP from asymptomatic individuals who may otherwise be missed using symptomatic testing alone
    corecore