Abstract:Reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) is an essential method for specific diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Unfortunately, false negative test results are often reported. In this study, we attempted to determine the principal causes leading to false negative results of RT-PCR detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNAs in respiratory tract specimens. Multiple sputum and throat swab specimens from 161 confirmed COVID-19 patients were tested with a commercial fluorescent RT-PCR kit targeting the ORF1ab and N regions of SARS-CoV-2 genome. The RNA level of a cellular housekeeping gene ribonuclease P/MRP subunit p30 (RPP30) in these specimens was also assessed by RT-PCR. Data for a total of 1052 samples were retrospectively re-analyzed and a strong association between positive results in SARS-CoV-2 RNA tests and high level of RPP30 RNA in respiratory tract specimens was revealed. By using the ROC-AUC analysis, we identified Ct cutoff values for RPP30 RT-PCR which predicted false negative results for SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR with high sensitivity (95.03%–95.26%) and specificity (83.72%–98.55%) for respective combination of specimen type and amplification reaction. Using these Ct cutoff values, false negative results could be reliably identified. Therefore, the presence of cellular materials, likely infected host cells, are essential for correct SARS-CoV-2 RNA detection by RT-PCR in patient specimens. RPP30 could serve as an indicator for cellular content, or a surrogate indicator for specimen quality. In addition, our results demonstrated that false negativity accounted for a vast majority of contradicting results in SARS-CoV-2 RNA test by RT-PCR.

Correction for Morón-López et al., "Comparison of Reverse Transcription (RT)-Quantitative PCR and RT-Droplet Digital PCR for Detection of Genomic and Subgenomic SARS-CoV-2 RNA"

Erratum for Sazed et al., "Direct Nasal Swab for Rapid Test and Saliva as an Alternative Biological Sample for RT-PCR in COVID-19 Diagnosis"

A DNA intercalating dye-based RT-qPCR alternative to diagnose SARS-CoV-2

An Open One-Step RT-qPCR for SARS-CoV-2 detection

Correction for Regueira-Iglesias et al., "Impact of 16S rRNA Gene Redundancy and Primer Pair Selection on the Quantification and Classification of Oral Microbiota in Next-Generation Sequencing"

Multicenter comparison of the Cobas 6800 system with the RealStar RT-PCR kit for the detection of SARS-CoV-2

Two-Step Reverse Transcription Droplet Digital PCR Protocols for SARS-CoV-2 Detection and Quantification

Comparison of Digital PCR and Quantitative PCR with Various SARS-CoV-2 Primer-Probe Sets

Analysis and forecasting of global real time RT-PCR primers and probes for SARS-CoV-2

Comparison of SARS‐CoV‐2 detection from nasopharyngeal swab samples by the Roche cobas 6800 SARS‐CoV‐2 test and a laboratory‐developed real‐time RT‐PCR test

Detection and quantification of SARS-CoV-2 by droplet digital PCR in real-time PCR negative nasopharyngeal swabs from suspected COVID-19 patients

Analytical sensitivity and efficiency comparisons of SARS-CoV-2 RT–qPCR primer–probe sets

Analytical sensitivity and efficiency comparisons of SARS-COV-2 qRT-PCR primer-probe sets

Rapid and Accurate Detection of the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron Variant with a CRISPR-Cas12a Reaction in the RT-qPCR Pot

Analysis and Forecasting of Global RT-PCR Primers for SARS-CoV-2

Detecting SARS-CoV-2 Virus by Reverse Transcription-Loop-mediated Isothermal Amplification

One-Step Reverse Transcription Droplet Digital PCR Protocols for SARS-CoV-2 Detection and Quantification

Correlating qRT-PCR, dPCR and Viral Titration for the Identification and Quantification of SARS-CoV-2: A New Approach for Infection Management

Discrimination of False Negative Results in RT-PCR Detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNAs in Clinical Specimens by Using an Internal Reference

Analytical comparisons of SARS-COV-2 detection by qRT-PCR and ddPCR with multiple primer/probe sets

A new SYBR Green real-time PCR to detect SARS-CoV-2