ArticleScientific reports2022
Capturing SARS-CoV-2 from patient samples with low viral abundance: a comparative analysis.
Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- vPro-MS enables identification of human-pathogenic viruses from patient samples by untargeted proteomics.Nature communications · 2025Article
- Article
- Considerations and Opportunities for Probe Capture Enrichment Sequencing of Emerging Viruses from Wastewater.Environmental science & technology · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Since the beginning of the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus pandemic, genome sequencing is essential to monitor viral mutations over time and by territory. This need for complete genetic information is further reinforced by the rapid spread of variants of concern. In this paper, we assess the ability of the hybridization technique, Capture-Seq, to detect the SARS-CoV-2 genome, either partially or in its integrity on patients samples. We studied 20 patient nasal swab samples broken down into five series of four samples of equivalent viral load from CT25 to CT36+ . For this, we tested 3 multi-virus panel as well as 2 SARS-CoV-2 only panels. The panels were chosen based on their specificity, global or specific, as well as their technological difference in the composition of the probes: ssRNA, ssDNA and dsDNA. The multi-virus panels are able to capture high-abundance targets but fail to capture the lowest-abundance targets, with a high percentage of off-target reads corresponding to the abundance of the host sequences. Both SARS-CoV-2-only panels were very effective, with high percentage of reads corresponding to the target. Overall, capture followed by sequencing is very effective for the study of SARS-CoV-2 in low-abundance patient samples and is suitable for samples with CT values up to 35.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.