COVID-19 experience reports: an emerging trend in scholarly communication

Kaliya-Perumal, Arun-Kumar; Kharlukhi, Jacquilyne; Omar, Usama Farghaly

doi:10.1016/j.puhe.2020.05.056

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The degree to which organic volatile organic compounds are diffused depends on preventive measures such as vaccination. The number of infections will depend on the extent to which this variant escapes the protection of the vaccine, as well as the effectiveness of enhancing the vaccine in boosting immunity, both of which unfortunately remain unclear and vaccines alone are not strong enough to control the pandemic [22].Therefore, the most effective way is to isolate the infected.Therefore, the most effective method is to detect positive patients by RT-qPCR technology and isolate infected people in time.Sequencing analyses had shown that found the Fosun test SARS-CoV-2 detection to be sensitive (87.5%) and speci c (100%). while e-Diagnostic test SARS-CoV-2 detection to be highly sensitive (100%) and speci c (100%) to screen respiratory tract samples from COVID-19 patients.The comparison of the sensitivity and speci city of the two reagents found that the sensitivity and speci city of the e-Diagnostic reagent were higher than that of the Fosun reagent( Fig.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Application of Metagenomic Next-Generation Sequencing (mNGS) and real-time RT-PCR Using different nasopharyngeal swabs in Diagnosing SARS-CoV-2 Omicron

LI,

Zhang,

Tong

et al. 2023

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The Omicron variant, which main types was BA5.2and BF.7 in China, in December 2022 to January 2023 leaded to off-target of the S and N genes, and the kits used were not adequately and independently evaluated when these agents are studied and developed. To ensure the accuracy of coronavirus test results, performance verification of commercial Real-Time quantitative PCR (RT-qPCR) was required. Objective: We performed a clinical evaluation for two Real Time SARS-CoV-2 assay, and to verify them based on different detection reagents and different clinical specimens. Methods: We performed clinical evaluations of two existing Chinese SARS-CoV-2 RT-qPCR kits COVID-19 nucleic acid detection kits (e-Diagnostic Biomedical, Wuhan, China) and 2019-nCoV nucleic acid diagnostic kits (Fosun Biotechnology, Shanghai, China) using BSD ( Bondson) (Guangzhou Bondson Biotechnology Co. Ltd.;batch number 2022101), quality controls provided by the inspection center and a large number of clinically confirmed specimens. Results: The coincidence rate for Fosun and e-Diagnostic kits were individually 95% and 100%. Verified that the detection limit for Fosun and e-Diagnostic kits was 300copies/mL. All were below the detection limit for Fosun reagent was 300copies/mL. e-Diagnostic was 500copies/mL. Fosun had the largest CV for ORF1ab and N gene at the the detection limit concentration(4.80%,3.49%), while e-Diagnostic had the smaller (0.93%,1.10%). Negative results were tested in cross-reactivity. During the verification of clinical samples, sequencing analyses had shown that Fosun single gene miss rate was relatively high, especially ORF1ab, followed by N gene miss rate. we survey that all N genes were detected in clinical specimens, ,ORFab dropout (i.e., a negative/low result) occurred in (10.8%) of 225 Omicron variant. Conclusions: Our results endorse the use of these two commercial kits for the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 in China, as their clinical performance has been fully validated by a large number of clinically confirmed cases.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%