Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34725400›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2021

A semi-automated, isolation-free, high-throughput SARS-CoV-2 reverse transcriptase (RT) loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP) test.

Jonas Schmidt, Sandro Berghaus, Frithjof Blessing, Folker Wenzel, Holger Herbeck, Josef Blessing, Peter Schierack, Stefan Rödiger, Dirk Roggenbuck

Abstract readComparative StudyEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

9 authors.

Jonas SchmidtInstitute for Laboratory Medicine, Singen, Germany.
Sandro BerghausInstitute for Laboratory Medicine, Singen, Germany.
Frithjof BlessingInstitute for Laboratory Medicine, Singen, Germany.
Folker WenzelFurtwangen University, Faculty of Medical and Life Sciences, Villingen-Schwenningen, Germany.
Holger HerbeckInstitute for Laboratory Medicine, Singen, Germany.
Josef BlessingInstitute for Laboratory Medicine, Singen, Germany.
Peter SchierackInstitute of Biotechnology, Faculty Environment and Natural Sciences, Brandenburg University of Technology Cottbus-Senftenberg, Senftenberg, Germany.
Stefan RödigerInstitute of Biotechnology, Faculty Environment and Natural Sciences, Brandenburg University of Technology Cottbus-Senftenberg, Senftenberg, Germany.
Dirk RoggenbuckInstitute of Biotechnology, Faculty Environment and Natural Sciences, Brandenburg University of Technology Cottbus-Senftenberg, Senftenberg, Germany. dirk.roggenbuck@b-tu.de.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Shortages of reverse transcriptase (RT)-polymerase chain reaction (PCR) reagents and related equipment during the COVID-19 pandemic have demonstrated the need for alternative, high-throughput methods for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2)-mass screening in clinical diagnostic laboratories. A robust, SARS-CoV-2 RT-loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) assay with high-throughput and short turnaround times in a clinical laboratory setting was established and compared to two conventional RT-PCR protocols using 323 samples of individuals with suspected SARS-CoV-2 infection. Limit of detection (LoD) and reproducibility of the isolation-free SARS-CoV-2 RT-LAMP test were determined. An almost perfect agreement (Cohen's kappa > 0.8) between the novel test and two classical RT-PCR protocols with no systematic difference (McNemar's test, P > 0.05) was observed. Sensitivity and specificity were in the range of 89.5 to 100% and 96.2 to 100% dependent on the reaction condition and the RT-PCR method used as reference. The isolation-free RT-LAMP assay showed high reproducibility (Tt intra-run coefficient of variation [CV] = 0.4%, Tt inter-run CV = 2.1%) with a LoD of 95 SARS-CoV-2 genome copies per reaction. The established SARS-CoV-2 RT-LAMP assay is a flexible and efficient alternative to conventional RT-PCR protocols, suitable for SARS-CoV-2 mass screening using existing laboratory infrastructure in clinical diagnostic laboratories.

Indexed as

PandemicsCOVID-19COVID-19 Nucleic Acid TestingGenome, ViralHumansInfection ControlLimit of DetectionMass ScreeningMolecular Diagnostic TechniquesNucleic Acid Amplification TechniquesReproducibility of ResultsReverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain ReactionReverse TranscriptionRNA-Directed DNA PolymeraseRNA, ViralSARS-CoV-2RNA-Directed DNA PolymeraseRNA, Viral

Identifiers

PMID34725400
PMCPMC8560768

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.