Influence of Different Inactivation Methods on Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 RNA Copy Number.
COVID-19
copy number
digital PCR
inactivation
Journal
Journal of clinical microbiology
ISSN: 1098-660X
Titre abrégé: J Clin Microbiol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 7505564
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
23 Jul 2020
23 Jul 2020
Historique:
received:
01
05
2020
accepted:
27
05
2020
pubmed:
30
5
2020
medline:
5
8
2020
entrez:
30
5
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has spread across the world and was characterized as a pandemic. To protect medical laboratory personnel from infection, most laboratories inactivate the virus causing COVID-19, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), in clinical samples before testing. However, the effect of inactivation on the detection results remains unknown. Here, we used a digital PCR assay to determine the absolute SARS-CoV-2 RNA copy number in 63 nasopharyngeal swab samples and assess the effect of inactivation methods on viral RNA copy number. Viral inactivation was performed by three different methods: (i) incubation with the TRIzol LS reagent for 10 min at room temperature, (ii) heating in a water bath at 56°C for 30 min, and (iii) high-temperature treatment, including autoclaving at 121°C for 20 min, boiling at 100°C for 20 min, and heating at 80°C for 20 min. Compared to the amount of RNA in the original sample, TRIzol treatment destroyed 47.54% of the nucleocapsid protein (N) gene and 39.85% of open reading frame (ORF) 1ab. For samples treated at 56°C for 30 min, the copy number of the N gene and ORF 1ab was reduced by 48.55% and 56.40%, respectively. The viral RNA copy number dropped by 50 to 66% after heating at 80°C for 20 min. Nearly no viral RNA was detected after autoclaving at 121°C or boiling at 100°C for 20 min. These results indicate that inactivation reduced the quantity of detectable viral RNA and may cause false-negative results, especially in weakly positive cases. Thus, use of the TRIzol reagent rather than heat inactivation is recommended for sample inactivation, as the TRIzol reagent had the least effect on the RNA copy number among the tested methods.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32467359
pii: JCM.00958-20
doi: 10.1128/JCM.00958-20
pmc: PMC7383554
pii:
doi:
Substances chimiques
Disinfectants
0
RNA, Viral
0
Types de publication
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2020 American Society for Microbiology.
Références
J Virol Methods. 2014 Oct;207:200-3
pubmed: 25064359
Euro Surveill. 2020 Jan;25(3):
pubmed: 31992387
Clin Chem. 2015 Jan;61(1):290-6
pubmed: 25361948
J Med Virol. 2020 Jun;92(6):538-539
pubmed: 32096564
J Med Virol. 2005 Oct;77(2):151-8
pubmed: 16121372
J Neurovirol. 2014 Aug;20(4):341-51
pubmed: 24781526
J Clin Microbiol. 2017 Feb;55(2):442-449
pubmed: 27881615
Clin Chem. 2020 Apr 1;66(4):549-555
pubmed: 32031583
J Clin Microbiol. 2013 Feb;51(2):540-6
pubmed: 23224089
J Clin Virol. 2016 Sep;82:70-75
pubmed: 27454232
N Engl J Med. 2020 Apr 30;382(18):1708-1720
pubmed: 32109013
Anal Chem. 2008 Dec 1;80(23):8975-81
pubmed: 19551929
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1999 Aug 3;96(16):9236-41
pubmed: 10430926
SLAS Technol. 2017 Aug;22(4):369-386
pubmed: 28448765
J Virol Methods. 2012 Dec;186(1-2):68-72
pubmed: 22974526
J Virol Methods. 2015 Oct;223:13-8
pubmed: 26190637
J Virol Methods. 2004 Aug;119(2):195-8
pubmed: 15158603
J Pathol Clin Res. 2016 Jun 28;2(4):201-209
pubmed: 27917295