Testing of four-sample pools offers resource optimization without compromising diagnostic performance of real time reverse transcriptase-PCR assay for COVID-19.
Journal
PloS one
ISSN: 1932-6203
Titre abrégé: PLoS One
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101285081
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2021
2021
Historique:
received:
09
01
2021
accepted:
04
05
2021
entrez:
18
5
2021
pubmed:
19
5
2021
medline:
2
6
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Quick identification and isolation of SARS-CoV-2 infected individuals is central to managing the COVID-19 pandemic. Real time reverse transcriptase PCR (rRT-PCR) is the gold standard for COVID-19 diagnosis. However, this resource-intensive and relatively lengthy technique is not ideally suited for mass testing. While pooled testing offers substantial savings in cost and time, the size of the optimum pool that offers complete concordance with results of individualized testing remains elusive. To determine the optimum pool size, we first evaluated the utility of pool testing using simulated 5-sample pools with varying proportions of positive and negative samples. We observed that 5-sample pool testing resulted in false negativity rate of 5% when the pools contained one positive sample. We then examined the diagnostic performance of 4-sample pools in the operational setting of a diagnostic laboratory using 500 consecutive samples in 125 pools. With background prevalence of 2.4%, this 4-sample pool testing showed 100% concordance with individualized testing and resulted in 66% and 59% reduction in resource and turnaround time, respectively. Since the negative predictive value of a diagnostic test varies inversely with prevalence, we re-tested the 4-sample pooling strategy using a fresh batch of 500 samples in 125 pools when the prevalence rose to 12.7% and recorded 100% concordance and reduction in cost and turnaround time by 36% and 30%, respectively. These observations led us to conclude that 4-sample pool testing offers the optimal blend of resource optimization and diagnostic performance across difference disease prevalence settings.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34003869
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0251891
pii: PONE-D-21-00825
pmc: PMC8130958
doi:
Substances chimiques
RNA, Viral
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e0251891Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Références
J Clin Microbiol. 2012 Mar;50(3):891-6
pubmed: 22205820
J Med Virol. 2020 Oct;92(10):1988-1994
pubmed: 32330297
JAMA. 2020 May 19;323(19):1967-1969
pubmed: 32250394
PLoS One. 2020 Sep 22;15(9):e0239492
pubmed: 32960929
Epidemiol Infect. 2020 Aug 06;148:e183
pubmed: 32758313
Am J Clin Pathol. 2020 May 5;153(6):715-718
pubmed: 32304208
J Clin Virol. 2020 Aug;129:104455
pubmed: 32485618
Lancet. 2020 Apr 25;395(10233):1321-1322
pubmed: 32277876
JAMA. 2002 Jul 10;288(2):216-21
pubmed: 12095386
Transbound Emerg Dis. 2020 Jul;67(4):1485-1491
pubmed: 32395897
Clin Microbiol Infect. 2020 Dec;26(12):1687.e1-1687.e5
pubmed: 32919074
J Med Virol. 2020 Nov;92(11):2306-2307
pubmed: 32369202
Rev Chilena Infectol. 2020 Jun;37(3):276-280
pubmed: 32853320
Indian J Med Res. 2020 Jul & Aug;152(1 & 2):88-94
pubmed: 32893844
Int J Mol Sci. 2020 Apr 24;21(8):
pubmed: 32344568
J Clin Microbiol. 2020 Aug 24;58(9):
pubmed: 32636214