Search

The COVID-19 pandemic is challenging the global supply chain and equipment needed for mass testing with RT-qPCR, the gold standard for SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis. Here, we propose the RT-LAMP assay as an additional strategy for rapid virus diagnosis. However, its validation as a diagnostic method remains uncertain. In this work, we validated the RT-LAMP assay in 1,266 nasopharyngeal swab samples with confirmed diagnosis by CDC 2019-nCoV RT-qPCR. Our cohort was divided, the first (n=984) was used to evaluate two sets of oligonucleotides (S1 and S3) and the second (n=281) to determine whether RT-LAMP could detect samples with several types of variants. This assay can identify positive samples by color change or fluorescence within 40 minutes and shows high concordance with RT-qPCR in samples with CT ≤35. Also, S1 and S3 are able to detect SARS-CoV-2 with a sensitivity of 68.4% and 65.8%, and a specificity of 98.9% and 97.1%, respectively. Furthermore, RT-LAMP assay identified 279 sequenced samples as positive (99.3% sensitivity) corresponding to the Alpha, Beta, Gamma, Delta, Epsilon, Iota, Kappa, Lambda, Mu and Omicron variants. In conclusion, RT-LAMP is able to identify SARS-CoV-2 with good sensitivity and excellent specificity, including all VOC, VOI, VUM and FMV variants. more...

Objectives The aim of this study was to investigate the feasibility of saliva sampling as a non-invasive and safer tool to detect severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and to compare its reproducibility and sensitivity with nasopharyngeal swab samples (NPS). The use of sample pools was also investigated. Methods A total of 2107 paired samples were collected from asymptomatic healthcare and office workers in Mexico City. Sixty of these samples were also analyzed in two other independent laboratories for concordance analysis. Sample processing and analysis of virus genetic material were performed according to standard protocols described elsewhere. A pooling analysis was performed by analyzing the saliva pool and the individual pool components. Results The concordance between NPS and saliva results was 95.2% (kappa 0.727, p = 0.0001) and 97.9% without considering inconclusive results (kappa 0.852, p = 0.0001). Saliva had a lower number of inconclusive results than NPS (0.9% vs 1.9%). Furthermore, saliva showed a significantly higher concentration of both total RNA and viral copies than NPS. Comparison of our results with those of the other two laboratories showed 100% and 97% concordance. Saliva samples are stable without the use of any preservative, and a positive SARS-CoV-2 sample can be detected 5, 10, and 15 days after collection when the sample is stored at 4 °C. Conclusions The study results indicate that saliva is as effective as NPS for the identification of SARS-CoV-2-infected asymptomatic patients. Sample pooling facilitates the analysis of a larger number of samples, with the benefit of cost reduction. more...