Journals / The European Research Journal / 2023 / Cilt: 9 Sayı: 5 - September 2023

Comparison of L452R mutation variant diagnosis in SARS-COV-2 PCR positive samples with two different qPCR kits

Pages
1142–1148
Publication Date
2023-09-04
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Therefore both kits can be used safely for COVID-19 symptomatic patients.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objectives: Quantitative reverse transcription‐polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) is used as the gold standard method to diagnose COVID-19 infection caused by SARS-CoV-2 which is the cause of the most important epidemic in world history.
📊
Key Findings & Data:It was aimed to compare the results of two of the most commonly used commercial kits for the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 mutation in our laboratory during the pandemic.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Therefore both kits can be used safely for COVID-19 symptomatic patients.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:5000 samples
⚙️Variables:SARS-CoV-2 · L452R mutation · COVID-19

Abstract

Objectives: Quantitative reverse transcription‐polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) is used as the gold standard method to diagnose COVID-19 infection caused by SARS-CoV-2 which is the cause of the most important epidemic in world history. It was aimed to compare the results of two of the most commonly used commercial kits for the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 mutation in our laboratory during the pandemic. Methods: Our study included 5000 SARS-CoV-2 PCR positive nasopharyngeal swab samples (2500 L452R mutation positive samples, 2500 L452R mutation negative samples). PCR positivity and negativity of the L452R mutation of the positive SARS-CoV-2 positive samples were identified with the Diagnovital® (DIAGNO5plex NS SARS-CoV-2 Real Time PCR Kit [A1 Life Sciences Istanbul]) kit. The mentioned samples were also studied with a different commercial PCR kit, Bio-Speedy® (SARS-CoV-2 Emerging Plus Real Time PCR Kit [Bioeksen R&D Technologies Istanbul]). Results: A total of 5000 samples included in the study were concluded as SARS-CoV-2 positive with both tests. One hundred and fifty of 2500 samples that were found positive for SARS-CoV-2 but negative for L452R mutations with the Diagnovital® kit were found positive with the Bio-Speedy® kit for SARS-CoV-2. The compatability between the two kits was found to be high (Kappa= 0.940). The mean Ct values of the samples found positive with the Diagnovital® kit and Bio-Speedy® kit were 24.15 ± 6.75 and 20.72 ± 7.17, respectively and the difference was statistically significant. Conclusions: It was determined the two commercial kits included in the study were extremely compatible based on their analysis. Therefore both kits can be used safely for COVID-19 symptomatic patients.

🔖

Cite This Article

GİRAY, B. G., AÇIK, G. G. (2023). Comparison of L452R mutation variant diagnosis in SARS-COV-2 PCR positive samples with two different qPCR kits. The European Research Journal, Cilt: 9 Sayı: 5 - September 2023, 1142–1148. https://ajindex.com/articles/960991

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (11)

  1. Dioni L, Orlandi A, Renteria SU, Favero C, Solazzo G, Oggioni M. Digital RT-PCR Chip method for detection of SARS-CoV-2 virus. J Immunol Methods 2022;509: 113339
  2. Ciottia M, Ciccozzi M, Pieric M, Bernardini S. The COVID-19 pandemic: viral variants and vaccine efficacy. Crit Rev Clin Lab Sci 2022;59:66-75
  3. Ontiveros N, Adol Bosque Aguirre DA, Gonzalez Urquijo M, Gonzalez DEH, Martinez Resendez FM, Schang L. Nasopharyngeal viral load at admission is not an independent predictor of thromboembolic complications in unvaccinated COVID 19 hospitalized patients. J Thromb Thrombolysis 2023;55:282-8
  4. Burjanivova T, Lukacova E, Lucansky V, Samec M, Podlesniy P, Kolkova Z. Sensitive SARS-CoV-2 detection, air travel Covid-19 testing, variant determination and fast direct PCR detection, using ddPCR and RT-qPCR methods. Acta Virol 2023;67:3-12
  5. Tang YW, Schmitz JE, Persing DH, Stratton CW. Laboratory diagnosis of COVID-19: current issues and challenges. J Clin Microbiol 2020;58:e00512-20
  6. Corman VM, Landt O, Kaiser M, Molenkamp R, Meijer A, Chu DKW, et al. Detection of 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) by real-time RT-PCR, Euro Surveill 2020;25:2000045
  7. Gülbudak H, Karvar Ş, Soydan G, Tezcan Ülger S, Kandemir Ö, Tamer L, et al. [Comparison of real time PCR cycle threshold values in symptomatic and asymptomatic COVID-19 patients]. Mikrobiyol Bul 2021;55:435-44. [Article in Turkish] 8. Xu K, Chen Y, Yuan J, Yi P, Ding C, Wu W, et al. Factors associated with prolonged viral RNA shedding in patients with COVID-19. Clin Infect Dis 2020;71:799-806
  8. COVID-19 Tanı Kitleri Ürün Değerlendirme İşlemleri. [online] Available from: https://hsgm.saglik.gov.tr/tr/duyurular/covid-19-tani-kitleri-urun-degerlendirme-islemleri.html [cited 03 May 2023].(Turkish
  9. Saxena KS, Kumar S, Ansari S, Paweska TJ, Maurya KV, Tripathi KA, et al. Characterization of the novel SARS-CoV-2 Omicron (B.1.1.529) variant of concern and its global perspective. J Med Virol 2022;94:1738-44
  10. Davies NG, Abbott S, Barnard CR, Jarvis IC, Kucharsk JA, Munday JD, et al. Estimated transmissibility and impact of SARS-CoV-2 lineage B.1.1.7 in England. Science 2021;372:eabg3055149
  11. Greaney JA, Loes NA, Crawford K, Starr TN, Malone KD, Chu YC, et al. Comprehensive mapping of mutations in the SARS-CoV-2 receptor-binding domain that affect recognition by polyclonal human plasma antibodies Cell Host Microbe 2021;29:463-76.e6 13. Planas D, Bruel T, Grzelak L, Guivel-Benhassine F, Staropoli I,