Results obtained with the regular RNA purification method
The results obtained with the regular RNA purification method allowed to declare 42 patients infected by the COVID-19 (COVID +), 57 patients non-infected by COVID-19 (COVID -) and 1 patient undetermined (COVID undetermined) (table 1).
Results obtained with the microFLOQ® Direct method
The results obtained with the microFLOQ® Direct method allowed to declare 18 patients infected by the COVID-19 (COVID +) and 82 patients non-infected by COVID-19 (COVID -) (table 1).
Concordance study
For each COVID +, COVID – and COVID undetermined populations and categories, we compared the results obtained with conventional RNA purification protocol to those obtained from microFLOQ® Direct protocol in order to determine the concordance or discordance between the two methods.
Concerning patients declared non-infected by COVID-19 using regular method, a complete concordance is obtained for all the samples (n=57).
Concerning patients declared infected by COVID-19, a complete concordance is obtained for the full category (n=14) where a CT median value for RNA purification method is under or equal to 28 (table 1) with minimum value of 17 and a maximum value around 38. For this full category, we observed a difference of +2 and +4 CT (CT median) with microFLOQ® Direct method compared to RNA purification method (figure 1). For the dissociated category, a complete concordance is observed for 4 samples where a CT median value and a minimum value are 38 (figure 1). For this category, we observed an offset to -3 CT (median value) with microFLOQ® Direct method compared to RNA purification method. On the other hand, at similar CT median value to 36 CT and more, we observed a complete discordance between microFLOQ® Direct and RNA purification protocols for 24 samples.
Concerning the CT for human targets, we observed a constant value for all conditions for both microFLOQ® Direct and RNA purification method with an offset between +4 to +6 for microFLOQ® Direct protocol. This result demonstrates that human target control detection is not correlated to the specific targets of COVID-19.
We can underline that for one sample Human Target is not detected using RNA purification method suggesting inhibition of RT PCR reaction due to residual inhibitors after purification, while a human CT value to 26 cycles were obtained with microFLOQ® Direct. These results show that use of microFLOQ® Direct reduce the volume of samples collected what can limit the sensibility of the method but, on the other hand, limit the impact of residual RT PCR inhibitors after RNA purification.
Table 1: Cycles Threshold (CT) values obtained using microFLOQ® Direct (MF) compared to RNA purification protocol from 100 samples.
COVID +: patients diagnosed infected by COVID-19; COVID -: patients diagnosed non-infected by COVID-19; COVID undetermined: impossible to provide a diagnostic due to the non-detection of Human Target.
Concordance: concordance between MF results and RNA purification results. A concordance is considered if a CT value or not CT value ((No CT) is obtained for both MF and RNA purification conditions; Discordance: discordance between MF results and RNA purification results. A discordance is considered if a CT value or not CT value ((No CT) is obtained for MF or RNA purification conditions.
Full: CT value obtained for the two specific targets of COVID-19 (Ngene and ORF 1 ab); dissociated: CT value obtained for only on specific targets of COVID-19 (Ngene or ORF1 ab).
CT Min: CT value minimum obtained; CT Max, CT value maximum obtained; CT Median: CT value median obtained; Delta CT median: difference of CT values between CT median obtained for MF protocol and CT median obtained for RNA purification protocol; n= number of samples processed.
This comparative study demonstrates that microFLOQ® Direct swab method provides 100% of concordant results compared to regular RNA purification method for patients non-infected by the COVID-19 and 43% of concordant results for patients declared infected by COVID-19 This difference of diagnosis is due to an offsets +6 to +7 CT if we consider minimum CT value and +2 to +4 CT for a median value when using microFLOQ® Direct protocol. This can be explained by a starting dilution factor which is not the same. The dilution factor for RNA purification protocol is 1:48 (250 µl from 1000 µl of transport medium and 5 µl from 60 µl of eluted RNA) while the dilution factor for microFLOQ® Direct protocol is 1:1000 considering that microFLOQ® Direct swab can collect a maximum volume of 2 µl (2 µl from 1000 µl of transport medium or direct collected from the tip of the nasopharyngeal swab and 5 µl to 10 µl of elution buffer).
If we consider a maximum CT value of 40, this offset of +6 to +7 CT is not significant for COVID-19 diagnostic concerning patients for which a CT value under 33 CT could be obtained from RNA purification method. For previous results obtained during internal validation studies of the GeneFirst® RUO COVID-19 Detection kit, we analysed a second time 38 samples were dissociated results were obtained at the first analysed with minimum CT value between 33 to 35, maximum CT value between 40 to 41 and a median CT value at 38. In 61% of cases (23 samples/38), a negative result (No CT) for NGene targets we obtained for the second analyse and in 42% of cases (16/38) for ORF1 ab target (data not published yet). These results demonstrate that for a CT value of 35 to 38 and more, the reproducibility of the regular RNA purification method is around 60%. We do not observe this variability for microFLOQ® Direct method suggesting that this protocol could be more robust than the RNA purification method.