Comparison of SARS-CoV-2 detection with the Cobas® 6800/8800 system on gargle samples using two sample processing methods with combined oropharyngeal/nasopharyngeal swab
- PMID: 34324212
- PMCID: PMC8426914
- DOI: 10.1002/jmv.27245
Comparison of SARS-CoV-2 detection with the Cobas® 6800/8800 system on gargle samples using two sample processing methods with combined oropharyngeal/nasopharyngeal swab
Abstract
Background: Gargle samples have been proposed as a noninvasive method for detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA. The clinical performance of gargle specimens diluted in Cobas® PCR Media and in Cobas® Omni Lysis Reagent was compared to oropharyngeal/nasopharyngeal swab (ONPS) for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA.
Study design: Participants were recruited prospectively in two COVID-19 screening clinics. In addition to the ONPS, participants gargled with 5 ml of natural spring water split in the laboratory as follows: 1 ml was added to 4.3 ml of polymerase chain reaction (PCR) media and 400 μl was added to 200 μl of lysis buffer. Testing was performed with the Cobas® SARS-CoV-2 test on the Cobas® 6800 or 8800 platforms.
Results: Overall, 134/647 (20.7%) participants were considered infected because the ONPS or at least one gargle test was positive. ONPS had, respectively, a sensitivity of 96.3% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 91.3-98.5); both gargle processing methods were slightly less but equally sensitive (90.3% [95% CI: 83.9-94.3]). When ONPS and gargle specimens were both positive, the mean cycle threshold (Ct ) was significantly higher for gargles, suggesting lower viral loads.
Conclusion: Gargle specimens directly added in PCR Media provide a similar clinical sensitivity to chemical lysis, both having a slightly, not significantly, lower sensitivity to ONPS.
Keywords: SARS-CoV-2; inactivation methods; molecular methods; specimen collection; transport medium.
© 2021 Wiley Periodicals LLC.
Similar articles
-
Natural spring water gargle samples as an alternative to nasopharyngeal swabs for SARS-CoV-2 detection using a laboratory-developed test.J Med Virol. 2022 Mar;94(3):985-993. doi: 10.1002/jmv.27407. Epub 2021 Nov 3. J Med Virol. 2022. PMID: 34672374 Free PMC article.
-
Comparison of saliva with oral and nasopharyngeal swabs for SARS-CoV-2 detection on various commercial and laboratory-developed assays.J Med Virol. 2021 Sep;93(9):5333-5338. doi: 10.1002/jmv.27026. Epub 2021 May 3. J Med Virol. 2021. PMID: 33851739 Free PMC article.
-
Clinical performance and sample freeze-thaw stability of the cobas®6800 SARS-CoV-2 assay for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 in oro-/nasopharyngeal swabs and lower respiratory specimens.J Clin Virol. 2020 Dec;133:104686. doi: 10.1016/j.jcv.2020.104686. Epub 2020 Nov 8. J Clin Virol. 2020. PMID: 33221622 Free PMC article.
-
Detection profile of SARS-CoV-2 using RT-PCR in different types of clinical specimens: A systematic review and meta-analysis.J Med Virol. 2021 Feb;93(2):719-725. doi: 10.1002/jmv.26349. Epub 2020 Aug 2. J Med Virol. 2021. PMID: 32706393 Free PMC article.
-
Screening for SARS-CoV-2 by RT-PCR: Saliva or nasopharyngeal swab? Rapid review and meta-analysis.PLoS One. 2021 Jun 10;16(6):e0253007. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0253007. eCollection 2021. PLoS One. 2021. PMID: 34111196 Free PMC article.
Cited by
-
The effect of sample site and collection procedure on identification of SARS-CoV-2 infection.Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2024 Dec 16;12(12):CD014780. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD014780. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2024. PMID: 39679851 Free PMC article.
-
Performance of saline and water gargling for SARS-CoV-2 reverse transcriptase PCR testing: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Eur Respir Rev. 2022 Sep 20;31(165):220014. doi: 10.1183/16000617.0014-2022. Print 2022 Sep 30. Eur Respir Rev. 2022. PMID: 36130785 Free PMC article.
-
Evaluation of Real-life Use of Point-of-care Rapid Antigen Testing for SARS-CoV-2 in Schools (EPOCRATES): a cohort study.CMAJ Open. 2022 Dec 6;10(4):E1027-E1033. doi: 10.9778/cmajo.20210327. Print 2022 Oct-Dec. CMAJ Open. 2022. PMID: 36622324 Free PMC article.
-
Natural spring water gargle samples as an alternative to nasopharyngeal swabs for SARS-CoV-2 detection using a laboratory-developed test.J Med Virol. 2022 Mar;94(3):985-993. doi: 10.1002/jmv.27407. Epub 2021 Nov 3. J Med Virol. 2022. PMID: 34672374 Free PMC article.
-
Evaluation of water gargle samples for SARS-CoV-2 detection using Abbott ID NOW COVID-19 assay.J Med Virol. 2022 Sep;94(9):4522-4527. doi: 10.1002/jmv.27847. Epub 2022 May 18. J Med Virol. 2022. PMID: 35535382 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Kandel CE, Young M, Serbanescu MA, et al. Detection of SARS‐CoV‐2 in outpatients: a multi‐centre comparison of self‐collected saline gargle, oral swab and combined oral‐anterior nasal swab to a provider collected nasopharyngeal swab. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2021:1‐5. in press. 10.1017/ice.2021.2:1-20 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
Miscellaneous