Search

Since the beginning of the pandemic, SARS-CoV-2 has caused problems for all of world’s population, not only in terms of deaths but also in terms of overloading healthcare facilities in all countries. Diagnosis is one of the key aspects of controlling the spread of SARS-CoV-2, and among the current molecular techniques, real-time PCR is considered as the gold standard. The availability of tests that allow for the rapid and accurate identification of SARS-CoV-2 is therefore of considerable importance. Moreover, if these tests allow for even minimal intervention by the operator, any risk of contamination is reduced. In this study, the performances of the new STANDARDTM M10 SARS-CoV-2 (SD Biosensor Inc., Suwon, Korea) rapid molecular test, which incorporates the above-mentioned features, were characterized. The clinical and analytical performances measured by testing different variants circulating in Italy of STANDARDTM M10 SARS-CoV-2 were compared to the test already on the market and recognized as the gold standard: Xpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2 (Cepheid, Sunnyvale, CA, USA). The results obtained between the two tests are largely comparable, suggesting that STANDARDTM M10 SARS-CoV-2 can be used with excellent results in the fight against the global spread of SARS-CoV-2.

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) was first identified in Wuhan, China, in late 2019 and is the causative agent of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Quantitative reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (qRT-PCR) represents the gold standard for diagnostic assays even if it cannot precisely quantify viral RNA copies. Thus, we decided to compare qRT-PCR with digital polymerase chain reaction (dPCR), which is able to give an accurate number of RNA copies that can be found in a specimen. However, the aforementioned methods are not capable to discriminate if the detected RNA is infectious or not. For this purpose, it is necessary to perform an endpoint titration on cell cultures, which is largely used in the research field and provides a tissue culture infecting dose per mL (TCID50/mL) value. Both research and diagnostics call for a model that allows the comparison between the results obtained employing different analytical methods. The aim of this study is to define a comparison among two qRT-PCR protocols (one with preliminary RNA extraction and purification and an extraction-free qRT-PCR), a dPCR and a titration on cell cultures. The resulting correlations yield a faithful estimation of the total number of RNA copies and of the infectious viral burden from a Ct value obtained with diagnostic routine tests. All these estimations take into consideration methodological errors linked to the qRT-PCR, dPCR and titration assays.