Abstract:Background: SARS-CoV-2 is a newly emerged coronavirus, causing the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak in December, 2019. As drugs and vaccines of COVID-19 remain in development, accurate virus detection plays a crucial role in the current public health crisis. Quantitative real-time reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR) kits have been reliably used for detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA since the beginning of the COVID-19 outbreak, whereas isothermal nucleic acid amplification-based point-of-care automated kits have also been considered as a simpler and rapid alternative. However, as these kits have only been developed and applied clinically within a short timeframe, their clinical performance has not been adequately evaluated to date. We describe a comparative study between a newly developed cross-priming isothermal amplification (CPA) kit (Kit A) and five RT-qPCR kits (Kits B–F) to evaluate their sensitivity, specificity, predictive values and accuracy. Methods: Fifty-two clinical samples were used including throat swabs (n=30), nasal swabs (n=7), nasopharyngeal swabs (n=7) and sputum specimens (n=8), comprising confirmed (n=26) and negative cases (n=26). SARS-CoV-2 detection was simultaneously performed on each sample using six nucleic acid amplification kits. The sensitivity, specificity, positive/negative predictive values (PPV/NPV) and the accuracy for each kit were assessed using clinical manifestation and molecular diagnoses as the reference standard. Reproducibility for RT-qPCR kits was evaluated in triplicate by three different operators using a SARS-CoV-2 RNA-positive sample. On the basis of the six kits’ evaluation results, CPA kit (Kit A) and two RT-qPCR Kits (Kit B and F) were applied to the SARS-CoV-2 detection in close-contacts of COVID-19 patients. Results: For Kit A, the sensitivity, specificity, PPV/NPV and accuracy were 100%. Among the five RT-qPCR kits, Kits B, C and F had good agreement with the clinical diagnostic reports (Kappa≥0.75); Kits D and E were less congruent (0.4≤Kappa<0.75). Differences between all kits were statistically significant (P<0.001). The reproducibility of RT-qPCR kits was determined using a coefficients of variation (CV) between 0.95% and 2.57%, indicating good reproducibility. Conclusions: This is the first comparative study to evaluate CPA and RT-qPCR kits’ specificity and sensitivity for SARS-CoV-2 detection, and could serve as a reference for clinical laboratories, thus informing testing protocols amid the rapidly progressing COVID-19 pandemic. Keywords: SARS-CoV-2; COVID-19; nucleic acid detection; real-time reverse transcriptase PCR (RT-qPCR); cross-priming isothermal amplification (CPA)

Comparison of the performance of two real-time fluorescent quantitative PCR kits for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid: a study based on large real clinical samples

Comparison of the diagnostic efficacy between two PCR test kits for SARS‐CoV‐2 nucleic acid detection

Validation of the Analytical Performance of Nine Commercial RT-qPCR Kits for SARS-CoV-2 Detection Using Certified Reference Material.

Comparative Evaluation of Six Molecular Assays Based on RT-PCR and Cross Primer Isothermal Amplification for SARS-CoV-2 RNA Detection

Comparative Evaluation of Six Nucleic Acid Amplification Kits for SARS-CoV-2 RNA Detection

Comparative Performance of SARS-CoV-2 Detection Assays Using Seven Different Primer-Probe Sets and One Assay Kit

Clinical Comparative Evaluation of the LabTurboTM AIO® Reverse Transcription-Polymerase Chain Reaction and World Health Organization-Recommended Assays for the Detection of Emerging SARS-CoV-2 Variants of Concern

Evaluation of the clinical performance of single-, dual-, and triple-target SARS-CoV-2 RT-qPCR methods

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

Analytical performance evaluation of five RT‐PCR kits for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2

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

Analytical Performance Evaluation Of Three Commercial Rapid Nucleic Acid Assays For Sars-Cov-2

Clinical Evaluation and Utilization of Multiple Molecular In Vitro Diagnostic Assays for the Detection of SARS-CoV-2

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

Comparison of qualitative and quantitative analyses of COVID-19 clinical samples

Comparison of Three TaqMan Real-Time Reverse Transcription-PCR Assays in Detecting SARS-CoV-2

Analysis and Validation of a Highly Sensitive One-Step Nested Quantitative Real-Time Polymerase Chain Reaction Assay for Specific Detection of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2

Comparison of analytical sensitivity and efficiency for SARS-CoV-2 primer sets by TaqMan-based and SYBR Green-based RT-qPCR

Evaluation and comparison of one-step real-time PCR and one-step RT-LAMP methods for detection of SARS-CoV-2

Multiple-centre Clinical Evaluation of an Ultrafast Single-Tube Assay for SARS-CoV-2 RNA