Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32848011›Full record

ArticlemSphere2020

Development and Clinical Application of a Rapid and Sensitive Loop-Mediated Isothermal Amplification Test for SARS-CoV-2 Infection.

Xuejiao Hu, Qianyun Deng, Junmin Li, Jierong Chen, Zixia Wang, Xiqin Zhang, Zhixin Fang, Haijian Li, Yunhu Zhao, Pan Yu and 5 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in mSphere, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 46 papers, 9 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
46citing papers in PubMed, 9 pooled it
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

46 citing papers in PubMed, 9 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 76 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

15 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Xuejiao Hu *Division of Laboratory Medicine, Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital, Guangdong Academy of Medical Sciences, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China.
Qianyun Deng *Division of Laboratory Medicine, Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital, Guangdong Academy of Medical Sciences, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China.
Junmin Li *MOE International Joint Lab for Synthetic Biology and Medicine, School of Biology and Biological Engineering, South China University of Technology, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China.
Jierong ChenDivision of Laboratory Medicine, Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital, Guangdong Academy of Medical Sciences, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China.
Zixia WangDivision of Laboratory Medicine, Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital, Guangdong Academy of Medical Sciences, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China.
Xiqin ZhangDivision of Laboratory Medicine, Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital, Guangdong Academy of Medical Sciences, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China.
Zhixin FangDepartment of Laboratory Medicine and Central Laboratories, Guangdong Second Provincial General Hospital, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China.
Haijian LiDepartment of Laboratory Medicine and Central Laboratories, Guangdong Second Provincial General Hospital, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China.
Yunhu ZhaoDivision of Laboratory Medicine, Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital, Guangdong Academy of Medical Sciences, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China.
Pan YuGenskey Biotechnology Co. Ltd., Beijing, People's Republic of China.
Wenmin LiDivision of Laboratory Medicine, Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital, Guangdong Academy of Medical Sciences, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China.
Xiaoming WangMOE International Joint Lab for Synthetic Biology and Medicine, School of Biology and Biological Engineering, South China University of Technology, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China.
Shan LiMOE International Joint Lab for Synthetic Biology and Medicine, School of Biology and Biological Engineering, South China University of Technology, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China.
Lei ZhangMOE International Joint Lab for Synthetic Biology and Medicine, School of Biology and Biological Engineering, South China University of Technology, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China lzhangce@scut.edu.cn houtieying@gdph.org.cn.ORCID 0000-0002-0837-730X
Tieying HouDivision of Laboratory Medicine, Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital, Guangdong Academy of Medical Sciences, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China lzhangce@scut.edu.cn houtieying@gdph.org.cn.ORCID 0000-0002-3902-2632
Guangdong Academy of Medical Sciences · CNState Key Laboratory of Synthetic Chemistry · CNGuangdong Provincial People's Hospital · CNBeijing VDJBio (China) · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) outbreak urgently necessitates sensitive and convenient COVID-19 diagnostics for the containment and timely treatment of patients. We aimed to develop and validate a novel reverse transcription-loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) assay to detect SARS-CoV-2. Patients with suspected COVID-19 and close contacts were recruited from two hospitals between 26 January and 8 April 2020. Respiratory samples were collected and tested using RT-LAMP, and the results were compared with those obtained by reverse transcription-quantitative PCR (RT-qPCR). Samples yielding inconsistent results between these two methods were subjected to next-generation sequencing for confirmation. RT-LAMP was also applied to an asymptomatic COVID-19 carrier and patients with other respiratory viral infections. Samples were collected from a cohort of 129 cases (329 nasopharyngeal swabs) and an independent cohort of 76 patients (152 nasopharyngeal swabs and sputum samples). The RT-LAMP assay was validated to be accurate (overall sensitivity and specificity of 88.89% and 99.00%, respectively) and diagnostically useful (positive and negative likelihood ratios of 88.89 and 0.11, respectively). RT-LAMP showed increased sensitivity (88.89% versus 81.48%) and high consistency (kappa, 0.92) compared to those of RT-qPCR for SARS-CoV-2 screening while requiring only constant-temperature heating and visual inspection. The time required for RT-LAMP was less than 1 h from sample preparation to the result. In addition, RT-LAMP was feasible for use with asymptomatic patients and did not cross-react with other respiratory pathogens. The developed RT-LAMP assay offers rapid, sensitive, and straightforward detection of SARS-CoV-2 infection and may aid the expansion of COVID-19 testing in the public domain and hospitals.

Indexed as

AdultAsymptomatic DiseasesBetacoronavirusClinical Laboratory TechniquesCoronavirus InfectionsCOVID-19COVID-19 TestingFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedMolecular Diagnostic TechniquesNucleic Acid Amplification TechniquesPandemicsPneumonia, ViralProspective Studiesasymptomatic carriersclinical diagnosisCOVID-19RT-LAMPSARS-CoV-2

Identifiers

PMID32848011
PMCPMC7449630
OpenAlexW3080514314

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.