Practical strategies for SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR testing in resource-constrained settings - Muller, Meredith S.; Chhetri, Srijana Bhattarai; Basham, Christopher; Rapp, Tyler; Lin, Feng-Chang; Lin, Kelly; Westreich, Daniel; Cerami, Carla; Juliano, Jonathan J.; Lin, Jessica T. (medRxiv, 2021)
Backgroun Standard nasopharyngeal swab testing for SARS-CoV-2 detection by PCR is not always feasible due to limitations in trained personnel, personal protective equipment, swabs, PCR reagents, and access to cold chain and biosafety hoods.Method We piloted the collection of nasal mid-turbinate swabs amenable to self-testing, including both standard polyester flocked swabs as well as 3D printed plastic lattice swabs, placed into either viral transport media or an RNA stabilization agent. Quantitative SARS-CoV-2 viral detection by RT-qPCR was compared to that obtained by nasopharyngeal sampling as the reference standard. Pooling specimens in the lab versus pooling swabs at the point of collection was also evaluated.Results Among 275 participants, flocked nasal swabs identified 104/121 individuals who were PCR-positive for SARS-CoV-2 by nasopharyngeal sampling (sensitivity 87%, 95% CI 79-92%), mostly missing those with low viral load (<10^3 viral copies/uL). 3D-printed nasal swabs showed similar sensitivity. When nasal swabs were placed directly into an RNA stabilizer, the mean 1.4 log decrease in viral copies/uL compared to nasopharyngeal samples was reduced to <1 log, even when samples were left at room temperature for up to 7 days. Pooling sample specimens or swabs both successfully detected samples >102 viral copies/uL.Conclusions Nasal swabs are likely adequate for clinical diagnosis of acute infections to help expand testing capacity in resource-constrained settings. When collected into an RNA preservative that also inactivates infectious virus, nasal swabs yielded quantitative viral loads approximating those obtained by nasopharyngeal sampling.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementResearch was supported by funds and charitable contributions from UNC Department of Medicine, UNC COVID-19 Response Fund/Health Foundation, and the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS), National Institutes of Health, through Grant Award Number UL1TR002489. DW was supported by the North Carolina Policy Collaboratory at UNC with funding from the North Carolina Coronavirus Relief Fund established and appropriated by the North Carolina General Assembly. Prototype 3D-printed NMT swabs were provided by Resolution Medical. Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:The study received ethical approval from the Institutional Review Board at the University of North Carolina-Chapel HillAll necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesData are available upon request