The translation of nucleic acid amplification into practical point-of-care and biosensor-integrated diagnostics is still significantly impeded by the necessity for rapid sample preparation. For this reason, a broad comparison of seven commercially available kits for DNA/RNA extraction containing their temperature-related adjustments was performed. Extracts isolated from SARS-CoV-2-positive nasopharyngeal swabs, viral stocks, as well as laboratory-prepared suspensions of clinically relevant Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria were evaluated by recombinase polymerase amplification (RPA) and real-time PCR. In addition, the impact of transport media for SARS-CoV-2 samples was investigated. Extraction performance varied markedly according to the kit, pathogen, sample background. For SARS-CoV-2, rapid extraction was more effective for samples collected in viral transport medium than in inactivation buffer. Across bacterial targets, performance was species dependent, highlighting substantial differences in compatibility between simplified extraction workflows and downstream amplification. Among the rapid methods tested, a simplified QuickExtract protocol (95 °C, 5 min) provided the most consistent overall results, although it did not uniformly match the reference silica-based method for all targets. In conclusion, these results demonstrate that rapid nucleic acid extraction must be thoroughly evaluated as an essential element of the entire sample-to-answer workflow, rather than being chosen as a standalone preprocessing step for point-of-care molecular diagnostics.
Polak et al. (2026) studied this question.