bioRxivMicrobiology
Multicenter comparison of the Cobas 6800 system with the RealStar RT-PCR kit for the detection of SARS-CoV-2
M.-L. Chaix, M. Wirden, L. Feghoul, M. Bertine, M.-L. Nere, Q. Le Hingrat, B. Abdi, D. Boutolleau, V. M. Ferre, A. Jary, C. Delaugerre, A.-G. Marcelin, D. Descamps, J. LeGoff, B. Visseaux
Abstract
BackgroundRT-PCR testing is crucial in the diagnostic of SARS-CoV-2 infection. The use of reliable and comparable PCR assays is a cornerstone to allow use of different PCR assays depending on the local equipment. In this work, we provide a comparison of the Cobas(R) (Roche) and the RealStar(R) assay (Altona). MethodsAssessment of the two assays was performed prospectively in three reference Parisians hospitals, using 170 clinical samples. They were tested with the Cobas(R) assay, selected to obtain a distribution of cycle threshold (Ct) as large as possible, and tested with the RealStar assay with three largely available extraction platforms: QIAsymphony (Qiagen), MagNAPure (Roche) and NucliSENS-easyMag (BioMerieux). ResultsOverall, the agreement (positive for at least one gene) was 76%. This rate differed considerably depending on the Cobas Ct values for gene E: below 35 (n = 91), the concordance was 99%. Regarding the positive Ct values, linear regression analysis showed a determination correlation (R2) of 0.88 and the Deming regression line revealed a strong correlation with a slope of 1.023 and an intercept of -3.9. Bland-Altman analysis showed that the mean difference (Cobas(R) minus RealStar(R)) was + 3.3 Ct, with a SD of + 2.3 Ct. ConclusionsIn this comparison, both RealStar(R) and Cobas(R) assays provided comparable qualitative results and a high correlation when both tests were positive. Discrepancies exist after 35 Ct and varied depending on the extraction system used for the RealStar(R) assay, probably due to a low viral load close to the detection limit of both assays.
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
- Test Agreement Between Roche Cobas 6800 and Cepheid GeneXpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2 Assays at High Cycle Threshold Ranges
K. J. Broder, A. Babiker, … C. S. Kraft·bioRxiv·May 5, 2020
- Comparison of three TaqMan Real-Time Reverse Transcription-PCR assays in detecting SARS-CoV-2
Y. Xiao, Z. Li, … J. Li·Journal of Virological MethodsPeer-reviewed·Feb 1, 2021
- Comparison of Cepheid Xpert Xpress and Abbott ID Now to Roche cobas for the Rapid Detection of SARS-CoV-2
M. C. Smithgall, I. Scherberkova, … D. Green·bioRxiv·Apr 22, 2020
- Comparison of commercial RT-PCR diagnostic kits for COVID-19
P. B. van Kasteren, B. van der Veer, … A. Meijer·Journal of Clinical VirologyPeer-reviewed·Jul 1, 2020
- Evaluation of Different PCR Assay Formats for Sensitive and Specific Detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA
J. Ratcliff, D. Nguyen, … P. Simmonds·bioRxiv·Jun 24, 2020
- Optimized qRT-PCR approach for the detection of intra- and extracellular SARS-CoV-2 RNAs