Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33924636›Full record

ArticleGenes2021

Deepening of In Silico Evaluation of SARS-CoV-2 Detection RT-qPCR Assays in the Context of New Variants.

Mathieu Gand, Kevin Vanneste, Isabelle Thomas, Steven Van Gucht, Arnaud Capron, Philippe Herman, Nancy H C Roosens, Sigrid C J De Keersmaecker

Abstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Genes, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

20 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. RT-qPCR Testing and Performance Metrics in the COVID-19 Era.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  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

8 authors.

Mathieu GandTransversal Activities in Applied Genomics, Sciensano, J. Wytsmanstraat 14, B-1050 Brussels, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0002-4424-2736
Kevin VannesteTransversal Activities in Applied Genomics, Sciensano, J. Wytsmanstraat 14, B-1050 Brussels, Belgium.
Isabelle ThomasViral Diseases, Sciensano, J. Wytsmanstraat 14, B-1050 Brussels, Belgium.
Steven Van GuchtViral Diseases, Sciensano, J. Wytsmanstraat 14, B-1050 Brussels, Belgium.
Arnaud CapronQuality of Laboratories, Sciensano, J. Wytsmanstraat 14, B-1050 Brussels, Belgium.
Philippe HermanExpertise and Service Provision, Sciensano, J. Wytsmanstraat 14, B-1050 Brussels, Belgium.
Nancy H C RoosensTransversal Activities in Applied Genomics, Sciensano, J. Wytsmanstraat 14, B-1050 Brussels, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0001-9218-078X
Sigrid C J De KeersmaeckerTransversal Activities in Applied Genomics, Sciensano, J. Wytsmanstraat 14, B-1050 Brussels, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0003-4198-4133

Funding

Sciensano COVID-19 special funding
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

For 1 year now, the world is undergoing a coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic due to the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). The most widely used method for COVID-19 diagnosis is the detection of viral RNA by RT-qPCR with a specific set of primers and probe. It is important to frequently evaluate the performance of these tests and this can be done first by an in silico approach. Previously, we reported some mismatches between the oligonucleotides of publicly available RT-qPCR assays and SARS-CoV-2 genomes collected from GISAID and NCBI, potentially impacting proper detection of the virus. In the present study, 11 primers and probe sets investigated during the first study were evaluated again with 84,305 new SARS-CoV-2 unique genomes collected between June 2020 and January 2021. The lower inclusivity of the China CDC assay targeting the gene N has continued to decrease with new mismatches detected, whereas the other evaluated assays kept their inclusivity above 99%. Additionally, some mutations specific to new SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern were found to be located in oligonucleotide annealing sites. This might impact the strategy to be considered for future SARS-CoV-2 testing. Given the potential threat of the new variants, it is crucial to assess if they can still be correctly targeted by the primers and probes of the RT-qPCR assays. Our study highlights that considering the evolution of the virus and the emergence of new variants, an in silico (re-)evaluation should be performed on a regular basis. Ideally, this should be done for all the RT-qPCR assays employed for SARS-CoV-2 detection, including also commercial tests, although the primer and probe sequences used in these kits are rarely disclosed, which impedes independent performance evaluation.

Indexed as

Computer SimulationCOVID-19COVID-19 Nucleic Acid TestingGenome, ViralHumansMutationReal-Time Polymerase Chain ReactionReverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain ReactionRNA ProbesSARS-CoV-2RNA Probesbioinformatics toolCOVID-19detectionin silico specificity evaluationmismatchesprimers and probesRT-qPCRSARS-CoV-2variantsWGS data

Identifiers

PMID33924636
PMCPMC8069896

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.