Abstract:Background: The SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant, with the main subtypes BA.5.2 and BF.7 in China, led to off-target effects on the S and N genes from December 1, 2022, to January 31, 2023. The kits used for studying and developing these agents were not adequately and independently evaluated. It is important to verify the performance of commercial Real-Time quantitative PCR (RT-qPCR) tests. Objective: We conducted a clinical evaluation of two Real Time SARS-CoV-2 Omicron assays to verify their performance using various detection reagents and clinical specimens. Methods: We performed clinical evaluations of two existing Chinese SARS-CoV-2 Omicron RT-qPCR kits 2019-nCoV nucleic acid diagnostic kits (Fosun Biotechnology, National instrument registration 20203400299, Shanghai, China) and COVID-19 nucleic acid detection kits (eDiagnosis Biomedicine, National instrument registration 20203400212, Wuhan, China) and 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 concordance rates for the Fosun and eDiagnosis kits were 95% and 100%, respectively. The detection limit for the Fosun and eDiagnosis kits was verified to be 300 copies/mL and 500 copies/mL. The Fosun assay exhibited the largest coefficient of variation (CV) for ORF1ab and N gene at the detection limit concentration (4.80%, 3.49%), whereas eDiagnosis showed a smaller CV (0.93%, 1.10%). In the reference product from the Hangzhou Clinical Laboratory Center test, it was found that Fosun had the lowest sensitivity of 93.47% and a specificity of 100%, while eDiagnosis exhibited 100% for both sensitivity and specificity. The lowest single target gene detection rate of Fosun reagents was 68.7% for the ORF1ab gene and 87.5% for the N gene, while eDiagnosis detection rate was 100%. Among the clinical group S specimens, the missed detection rate of the Fosun reagent was 10.9%, which was higher than the 3.9% of eDiagnosis. However, there was no significant difference in the clinical diagnostic efficiency of the two reagents. Conclusions: The ORF1ab and N assays of SARS-CoV-2 Omicron on the eDiagnosis platform yielded higher values compared to those on the Fosun platform. Consequently, the eDiagnosis kit has also been used as standard detection reagents. Considering that the Fosun reagent has a relatively low detection limit and targets three single genes, it is more advantageous as a confirmatory reagent for the new museum.

Use of exhaled breath condensate (EBC) in the diagnosis of SARS-COV-2 (COVID-19)

Exhaled breath condensate (EBC) for SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis still an open debate

RT-PCR diagnosis of COVID-19 from exhaled breath condensate: a clinical study

Potential Use of Exhaled Breath Condensate for Diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 Infections: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Review of non-invasive detection of SARS-CoV-2 and other respiratory pathogens in exhaled breath condensate

A mask-based diagnostic platform for point-of-care screening of Covid-19

Use of RT-PCR in conjunction with a respiratory pathogen assay to concurrently determine the prevalence of bacteria and SARS-CoV-2 from the nasopharynx of outpatients

SARS-CoV-2 not Detected in the Nasopharyngeal Sample but in Bronchoalveolar Lavage Fluid

SARS-CoV-2 RNA load and detection rate in exhaled breath condensate collected from COVID-19 patients infected with Delta variant

Performance Comparison of the Cobas® Liat® and Cepheid® GeneXpert® Systems on SARS-CoV-2 Detection in Nasopharyngeal Swab and Posterior Oropharyngeal Saliva.

Diagnosis with Metagenomic Next-Generation Sequencing (mNGS) technology and real-time PCR for SARS-CoV-2 Omicron detection using various nasopharyngeal swabs in SARS-CoV-2 Omicron

Evaluation of Self-collected Saliva Samples Without Viral Transport Media for SARS-CoV-2 Testing via RT-PCR and Comparison of Amplicon Sequences Against Commonly Used Primers in Diagnostic Assays

Metabolomics Diagnosis of COVID-19 from Exhaled Breath Condensate

Nucleic Acid Detection and Quantitative Analysis of Influenza Virus Using Exhaled Breath Condensate

RT-PCR detection of SARS-CoV-2 in nasopharyngeal and salivary specimens: contribution of alternative collection systems and extraction processes to cope with mass screening. Interpretation of low viral loads

Proteomic characteristics and diagnostic potential of exhaled breath particles in patients with COVID-19

Breath of Health: spectroscopy-based breath test for the detection of SARS-CoV-2

Detecting SARS-CoV-2 in the Breath of COVID-19 Patients

Comparison of nasopharyngeal swab and oral fluid collected by ORACOL Saliva Collection System for molecular detection of SARS-CoV-2

Examination of SARS-CoV-2 serological test results from multiple commercial and laboratory platforms with an in-house serum panel

Saliva as a Noninvasive Specimen for Detection of SARS-CoV-2