Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, Melbourne, Australia.
Ophthalmology, Department of Surgery, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.
Sci Rep. 2021 Nov 18;11(1):22493. doi: 10.1038/s41598-021-01472-3.
The COVID-19 pandemic caused by SARS-CoV-2 has infected millions worldwide, therefore there is an urgent need to increase our diagnostic capacity to identify infected cases. Although RT-qPCR remains the gold standard for SARS-CoV-2 detection, this method requires specialised equipment in a diagnostic laboratory and has a long turn-around time to process the samples. To address this, several groups have recently reported the development of loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP) as a simple, low cost and rapid method for SARS-CoV-2 detection. Herein we present a comparative analysis of three LAMP-based assays that target different regions of the SARS-CoV-2: ORF1ab RdRP, ORF1ab nsp3 and Gene N. We perform a detailed assessment of their sensitivity, kinetics and false positive rates for SARS-CoV-2 diagnostics in LAMP or RT-LAMP reactions, using colorimetric or fluorescent detection. Our results independently validate that all three assays can detect SARS-CoV-2 in 30 min, with robust accuracy at detecting as little as 1000 RNA copies and the results can be visualised simply by color changes. Incorporation of RT-LAMP with fluorescent detection further increases the detection sensitivity to as little as 100 RNA copies. We also note the shortcomings of some LAMP-based assays, including variable results with shorter reaction time or lower load of SARS-CoV-2, and false positive results in some experimental conditions and clinical saliva samples. Overall for RT-LAMP detection, the ORF1ab RdRP and ORF1ab nsp3 assays have faster kinetics for detection but varying degrees of false positives detection, whereas the Gene N assay exhibits no false positives in 30 min reaction time, which highlights the importance of optimal primer design to minimise false-positives in RT-LAMP. This study provides validation of the performance of LAMP-based assays as a rapid, highly sensitive detection method for SARS-CoV-2, which have important implications in development of point-of-care diagnostics for SARS-CoV-2.
由 SARS-CoV-2 引起的 COVID-19 大流行已在全球范围内感染了数百万人,因此迫切需要提高我们的诊断能力以识别感染病例。尽管 RT-qPCR 仍然是 SARS-CoV-2 检测的金标准,但该方法需要在诊断实验室中使用专业设备,并且处理样本的周转时间较长。为了解决这个问题,最近有几个小组报告了环介导等温扩增(LAMP)的发展,作为一种简单、低成本和快速的 SARS-CoV-2 检测方法。在此,我们对针对 SARS-CoV-2 的不同区域的三种基于 LAMP 的检测方法进行了比较分析:ORF1ab RdRP、ORF1ab nsp3 和 Gene N。我们使用比色或荧光检测对它们在 LAMP 或 RT-LAMP 反应中的灵敏度、动力学和 SARS-CoV-2 诊断的假阳性率进行了详细评估。我们的结果独立验证了所有三种检测方法都可以在 30 分钟内检测到 SARS-CoV-2,具有检测低至 1000 个 RNA 拷贝的稳健准确性,并且结果可以通过颜色变化简单地可视化。将 RT-LAMP 与荧光检测相结合,进一步将检测灵敏度提高到低至 100 个 RNA 拷贝。我们还注意到一些基于 LAMP 的检测方法的缺点,包括在较短的反应时间或 SARS-CoV-2 较低负荷下的结果不一致,以及在某些实验条件和临床唾液样本中出现假阳性结果。总体而言,对于 RT-LAMP 检测,ORF1ab RdRP 和 ORF1ab nsp3 检测方法的检测动力学更快,但存在不同程度的假阳性检测,而 Gene N 检测方法在 30 分钟反应时间内没有假阳性,这凸显了优化引物设计以最大限度地减少 RT-LAMP 中的假阳性的重要性。这项研究验证了基于 LAMP 的检测方法作为 SARS-CoV-2 快速、高灵敏度检测方法的性能,这对 SARS-CoV-2 即时护理诊断的发展具有重要意义。