bioRxivMicrobiologyPreprint
Overhauling a faulty control in the CDC-recommended SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR test panel
R. J. Dekker, W. A. Ensink, S. van Leeuwen, H. Rauwerda, T. M. Breit
Abstract
To battle the COVID-19 pandemic, widespread testing for the presence of the SARS-CoV-2 virus is worldwide being employed by specific real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR) of viral RNA. The CDC has issued a recommended panel of PCR-based test sets that entail several primer/probe sets that target the SARS-CoV-2 N-gene, but also one that targets the human RNase P gene (h-RP) as a positive control for RNA extraction and/or reverse-transcription (RT) efficacy. We discovered that the CDC-recommended h-RP primer/probe set has a faulty design, because both PCR primers are located in the same exon, which allows for unwanted PCR-amplification of background genomic DNA (gDNA). By removing RNA from nose-swab samples by an RNase treatment, we showed that the presence of gDNA in samples resulted in false-positive signals for the h-RP test control. This is rather serious, because it could lead to false-negative test outcomes, since the CDC interpretation of an absent SARS-CoV-2 rRT-PCR signal plus a positive h-RP rRT-PCR signal is interpreted as "2019-nCoV not detected", whereas a false-positive h-RP rRT-PCR signal resulting from amplification of gDNA should be interpreted as "Invalid Result" and the procedure should be repeated. In order to overhaul the faulty h-RP rRT-PCR primer/probe set with minimal modification, we designed and tested several new h-RP reverse primers. Replacement of the CDC-recommended PCR reverse primer with our selected exon-exon junction reverse primer corrected the problem of false-positive results with this important SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR test control and thus eliminated the problem of potential false-negative COVID-19 diagnoses.
- organism: human
- assay: bulk RNA-seq
- research focus: host-pathogen & immune response
- research focus: benchmarking
- approach: experimental assay
Reproducibility ledger
Nobody has reported trying to reproduce this paper yet. Did you replicate an experiment or run the code? Your report saves the next lab a week.
Sign in to file a reproducibility report.
Related papers
- Patient DNA cross-reactivity of the CDC SARS-CoV-2 extraction control leads to an inherent potential for false negative results
Adam P. Rosebrock·Clinical ChemistryPeer-reviewed·Nov 4, 2020
- DIRECT RT-qPCR DETECTION OF SARS-CoV-2 RNA FROM PATIENT NASOPHARYNGEAL SWABS WITHOUT AN RNA EXTRACTION STEP
E. A. Bruce, M.-L. Huang, … J. W. Botten·bioRxiv·Mar 20, 2020
- Pitfalls in SARS-CoV-2 PCR diagnostics
K. Wernike, M. Keller, … M. Beer·bioRxiv·Jun 3, 2020
- SYBR green one-step qRT-PCR for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA in saliva
Diep R Ganguly, Sarah Rottet, … Aude M. Fahrer·bioRxiv·May 29, 2020
- The Potential Use of Unprocessed Sample for RT-qPCR Detection of COVID-19 without an RNA Extraction Step
Arunkumar Arumugam, Season Wong·bioRxiv·Apr 6, 2020
- Optimized qRT-PCR approach for the detection of intra- and extracellular SARS-CoV-2 RNAs