ArticlePloS one2025
Over-the-counter carrageenan-based sprays may interfere with PCR testing of nasopharyngeal swabs to detect SARS-CoV-2.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Carrageenan-containing nasal sprays, available over-the-counter (OTC), are often marketed as having anti-viral effects. Carrageenan belongs to the glycosaminoglycan family alongside heparin, and heparin is known to inhibit real-time quantitative polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR) in nasopharyngeal swabs used to detect SARS-CoV-2. As heparin and carrageenan share structural similarities, this work aimed to investigate the interferent effect of carrageenan on RT-qPCR for SARS-CoV-2 detection across 4 different diagnostic platforms. This work demonstrated that in the presence of carrageenan samples return inaccurate and invalid results on the Seegene STARlet, while qualitative accuracy was maintained on the Cepheid GeneXpert, Roche Cobas LIAT, and Hologic Panther Aptima. Evidence of carrageenan interference on SARS-CoV-2 testing was consistent across two OTC brands and research-grade reconstituted iota-carrageenan, with 80% of results returning invalid regardless of the carrageenan formulation added to the samples. Further, a preliminary in vivo interference study demonstrated an increased Ct value within 15 minutes of carrageenan dosage, with Ct values restored 60 minutes post-application. A direct comparison of carrageenan- and heparin-mediated PCR interference demonstrated that carrageenan PCR interference occurs to a lesser degree, but is not reversible by the addition of heparinase I. As carrageenan is available OTC, interference with PCR testing that causes an increase in false negative results could lead to accidental spread of disease and could therefore have significant public health impacts on community testing of respiratory infectious diseases via PCR.
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.