This is the authors' abstract. We don't add key points for this paper.
Amplicon-based sequencing methods have been central in characterizing the diversity, transmission and evolution of SARS-CoV-2, but need to be rigorously assessed for clinical utility. Here, we validated the Swift Biosciences’ SARS-CoV-2 Swift Normalase Amplicon Panels using remnant clinical specimens. High quality genomes meeting our established library and sequence quality criteria were recovered from positive specimens with a 95% limit of detection of ≥ 40.08 SARS-CoV-2 copies/PCR reaction. Breadth of genome recovery was evaluated across a range of Ct values (11.3 – 36.7, median 21.6). Out of 428 positive samples, 406 (94.9%) generated genomes with < 10% Ns, with a mean genome coverage of 13,545X ± SD 8,382X. No genomes were recovered from PCR-negative specimens (n = 30), or from specimens positive for non-SARS-CoV-2 respiratory viruses (n = 20). Compared to whole-genome shotgun metagenomic sequencing (n = 14) or Sanger sequencing for the spike gene (n = 11), pairwise identity between consensus sequences was 100% in all cases, with highly concordant allele frequencies (R 2 = 0.99) between Swift and shotgun libraries. When samples from different clades were mixed at varying ratios, expected variants were detected even in 1:99 mixtures. When deployed as a clinical test, 268 tests were performed in the first 23 weeks with a median turnaround time of 11 days, ordered primarily for outbreak investigations and infection control.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Shrestha et al. (2021) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 8 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: