Potential pitfalls in analysing a SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR assay and how to standardise data interpretation.

The emergence of SARS-CoV-2 in December 2019 lead to the rapid implementation of assays for virus detection, with real-time RT-PCR arguably considered the gold-standard. In our laboratory Altona RealStar SARS-Cov-2 RT-PCR kits are used with Applied Biosystems QuantStudio 7 Flex thermocyclers. Real-time PCR data interpretation is potentially complex and time-consuming, particularly for SARS-CoV-2, where the laboratory handles up to 2000 samples each day. To simplify this, an automated system that rapidly interprets the curves, developed by diagnostics.ai was introduced. QuantStudio software provides two methods for interpretation, relative threshold and baseline threshold. Many of our assays are analysed using relative threshold and directly exported into pcr.ai software, however, in some rare cases the QuantStudio software assigns positive results to 'ambiguous' curves, flagged by pcr.ai, requiring manual intervention. Due to the sample numbers processed and the proportionate increase in curves flagged by pcr.ai, the two methods were investigated. An audit was carried out to determine the frequency of these curves, involving 138 samples tested during November 2020, including 97 serial samples from 38 patients and it was determined that the relative threshold method produced unreliable results in many of these cases. In addition, we present a solution to simplify the interpretation and automate the process.