Difference between revisions of "User:Shawndouglas/sandbox/sublevel1"

From LIMSWiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
Line 1: Line 1:
As the pandemic has progressed and test manufacturers have become more experienced with SARS-CoV-2 test development, multiplex testing has become an option. The multiplex assay—an immunoassay test able to measure multiple analytes in a single test—is certainly not new in itself. In 1989, R. Ekins developed the ambient analyte theory, which stated that miniaturizing an immunoassay can lead to an improved limit of detection (LOD). That work influenced the future development of microarray multiplex technology principles.<ref name="TigheELISA15">{{Cite journal |last=Tighe |first=Patrick J. |last2=Ryder |first2=Richard R. |last3=Todd |first3=Ian |last4=Fairclough |first4=Lucy C. |date=2015-04 |title=ELISA in the multiplex era: Potentials and pitfalls |url=https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/prca.201400130 |journal=PROTEOMICS – Clinical Applications |language=en |volume=9 |issue=3-4 |pages=406–422 |doi=10.1002/prca.201400130 |issn=1862-8346 |pmc=PMC6680274 |pmid=25644123}}</ref> By 2013, development of multiplex protein immunoassays was becoming increasingly prominent.<ref name="TigheELISA15" />
As the pandemic has progressed, you may have heard talk of a "delta" variant of SARS-CoV-2, which is reportedly more contagious and virulent than the initial strain that kicked off the pandemic.<ref name="CDCDelta21">{{cite web |url=https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/variants/delta-variant.html |title=Delta Variant: What We Know About the Science |author=Centers for Disease Control and Prevention |publisher=Centers for Disease Control and Prevention |date=26 August 2021 |accessdate=18 September 2021}}</ref> One or more variants of a virus are expected as time progresses, and some of those variants can cause significantly more problems than the source virus. As such, analytical testing of the virus over time is vital to public health.


As of September 2021, eighteen "multi-analyte" ''in vitro'' molecular diagnostic tests are shown as receiving EUAs by the FDA, four of them even authorized for CLIA waived testing.<ref name="FDAInVitroEUAs21">{{cite web |url=https://www.fda.gov/medical-devices/coronavirus-disease-2019-covid-19-emergency-use-authorizations-medical-devices/in-vitro-diagnostics-euas-molecular-diagnostic-tests-sars-cov-2 |title=In Vitro Diagnostics EUAs - Molecular Diagnostic Tests for SARS-CoV-2 |publisher=U.S. Food and Drug Administration |date=07 September 2021 |accessdate=07 September 2021}}</ref> Common additional targets for analysis among the various kits include influenza A, influenza B, and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV).<ref name="FDAInVitroEUAs21" /> However, several multiplex test kits cover an even broader array of respiratory-affecting organism types and subtypes such as adenovirus and a few other coronavirus types, to name a few. Kits include the ePlex Respiratory Pathogen Panel 2<ref name="HintonePlex20">{{cite web |url=https://www.fda.gov/media/142902/download |format=PDF |title=ePlex Respiratory Pathogen Panel 2 (ePlex RP2 Panel) |author=Hinton, D.M. |publisher=U.S. Food and Drug Administration |date=07 October 2020 |accessdate=19 September 2021}}</ref>, the NxTAG Respiratory Pathogen Panel + SARS-CoV-2<ref name="HintonNxTAG21">{{cite web |url=https://www.fda.gov/media/146492/download |format=PDF |title=NxTAG Respiratory Pathogen Panel + SARS-CoV-2 |author=Hinton, D.M. |publisher=U.S. Food and Drug Administration |date=03 March 2021 |accessdate=19 September 2021}}</ref>, the QIAstat-Dx Respiratory SARS-CoV-2 Panel<ref name="HintonQIAstat21">{{cite web |url=https://www.fda.gov/media/136569/download |format=PDF |title=QIAstat-Dx Respiratory SARS-CoV-2 Panel |author=Hinton, D.M. |publisher=U.S. Food and Drug Administration |date=29 July 2021 |accessdate=19 September 2021}}</ref>, and the BioFire Respiratory Panel 2.1-EZ.<ref name="HintonBioFireRes21">{{cite web |url=https://www.fda.gov/media/142693/download |format=PDF |title=BioFire Respiratory Panel 2.1-EZ (RP2.1-EZ) |author=Hinton, D.M. |publisher=U.S. Food and Drug Administration |date=30 August 2021 |accessdate=19 September 2021}}</ref> (Of the four, the BioFire panel is approved for CLIA waived testing.<ref name="FDAInVitroEUAs21" />) Adding multiplex testing of SARS-CoV-2 plus other organisms to your laboratory will largely revolve around your lab's CLIA status and assessment of the available options.
The purpose of variant testing can be described in two ways, one for public health reasons and another for clinical care reasons. On the public health side, analysis of SARS-CoV-2 variants provides an unbiased, population-level view "of the specific viral strains in circulation and monitors changes in the viral genome over time."<ref name="BuchanSARS21">{{cite web |url=https://www.amp.org/AMP/assets/File/clinical-practice/COVID/AMP_RC_VariantTestingforSARSCOV2_4_28_21.pdf |format=PDF |title=SARS-CoV-2 Variant Testing |work=Rapid Communication |author=Buchan, B.W.; Wolk, D.M.; Yao, J.D. |publisher=Association for Molecular Pathology |date=28 April 2021 |accessdate=18 September 2021}}</ref> With enough public health laboratories conducting this type of analysis—typically whole-genome sequencing (WGS) using [[next-generation sequencing]] (NGS) techniques—a clearer picture of how an outbreak spreads is gained, as well as what variants are taking hold and further threatening human populations (even those that are vaccinated). This information is typically shared through the public health system for surveillance and reporting purposes, though the affected patients themselves may never see the data.<ref name="BuchanSARS21" />


Multiplexing provides a variety of benefits for laboratories and patients. In their 2015 paper on ELISA and multiplex technologies, Tighe ''et al'' find that multiplexed immunoassays have the potential to decrease diagnosis times and reduce assay costs. "At the same time, such multiplexing offers more comprehensive analysis whether for research purposes, differential diagnoses, or monitoring of therapeutic interventions."<ref name="TigheELISA15" /> They also note the potential for improved health surveillance of patients, catching early-onset diseases by looking for informative biomarkers.<ref name="TigheELISA15" /> From the perspective of diagnosing infections of SARS-CoV-2 or influenza, the CDC adds that multiplexing helps preserve testing supplies that may be in short supply, conduct more tests in a given time period, and paint a clearer picture of both viruses and their prevalence in a given population.<ref name="CDCInflu21">{{cite web |url=https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/lab/multiplex.html |title=CDC’s Influenza SARS-CoV-2 Multiplex Assay and Required Supplies |author=Centers for Disease Control and Prevention |publisher=Centers for Disease Control and Prevention |date=13 July 2021 |accessdate=19 September 2021}}</ref>
On the clinical care side, analysis of SARS-CoV-2 variants provides further insights into improving COVID-19 patient outcomes. Buchan ''et al.'' identify three potential insights that clinicians may gain, noting that variant testing allows the clinician<ref name="BuchanSARS21" />:
 
* to distinguish between an existing, persistent infection caused by one viral strain vs. re-infection by a different viral strain;
* to determine whether a patient not responding to a treatment is affected by a specific viral spike protein (S) gene mutation that is "potentially resistant or less susceptible to neutralizing antibodies or monoclonal antibodies"; and
* to detect in the serum or plasma of a patient post-vaccination "viral S gene substitutions in specific variants that are potentially resistant or less susceptible" to the antibodies the vaccine generates.
 
If, for example, a patient is diagnosed with a variant that is tied to heightened disease severity, the clinician can opt for additional treatments early on to counteract the variant's effects on the patient. This testing is done in a hospital or reference lab by WGS or by targeting a portion of the genome (e.g., a spike protein) or a specific mutation (using RT-PCR). However, according to Buchan ''et al.'', the contributions a mutation makes to a "variant's attributes is not entirely understood, and there is no definitive evidence that directly links a given mutation to poor outcomes, significantly reduced efficacy of SARS-CoV-2 therapies, or vaccine coverage."<ref name="BuchanSARS21" />
 
That said, and leaving the public health element to the side, if you are a laboratory conducting clinical analyses of SARS-CoV-2 specimens, the likelihood of including viral sequencing and sequence analysis for variant testing may be low for your facility. Such testing is a multi-step process requiring a non-trivial set of resources, often available to large commercial diagnostic laboratories.<ref name="BuchanSARS21" /><ref name="WilliamsEnhanc21">{{cite web |url=https://health.mo.gov/emergencies/ert/alertsadvisories/pdf/update21921.pdf |format=PDF |title=Enhancing Public Health Surveillance for Variant SARSCoV-2 Viruses in Missouri |author=Williams, R.W. |publisher=Missouri Department of Health & Senior Services |date=19 February 2021 |accessdate=18 September 2021}}</ref> The CDC represents one possible workflow for genomic sequencing as such<ref name="CDCRole21">{{cite web |url=https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/variants/cdc-role-surveillance.html |title=CDC’s Role in Tracking Variants |author=Centers for Disease Control and Prevention |publisher=Centers for Disease Control and Prevention |date=08 September 2021 |accessdate=18 September 2021}}</ref>:
 
# A specimen containing the SARS-CoV-2 virus is received by the lab and promptly entered into the [[laboratory information system]] (LIS).
# The RNA of the SARS-CoV-2 virus is extracted from the sample and then converted to complimentary DNA. It is then enriched and loaded into the appropriate NGS instrument.
# The instrument runs the sequencing and raw data is collected, with the lab maintaining quality control steps. The raw data is turned into actionable sequence data.
# The sequence data is verified for suitability, with a resequencing occurring if found to be inadequate. Otherwise, the data is then analyzed and interpreted.
# The final approved sequencing results are reported to the appropriate state, local, tribal, or territorial public health department.<ref name="CDCGuidanceSeq21">{{cite web |url=https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/lab/resources/reporting-sequencing-guidance.html |title=Guidance for Reporting SARS-CoV-2 Sequencing Result |author=Centers for Disease Control and Prevention |publisher=Centers for Disease Control and Prevention |date=23 June 2021 |accessdate=19 September 2021}}</ref>
 
If your diagnostic lab has or is planning on adding sequencing tools to supplement clinical diagnostics, it may make sense to consider adding variant testing to your available options. But in reality, this sort of testing may largely be left to large institutions, such as the University of Rochester Vaccine Treatment Evaluation Unit or the Yale School of Public Health.<ref name="DupuyCOVID21">{{cite web |url=https://apnews.com/article/fact-checking-549965482111 |title=COVID-19 variants tested through genome sequencing |author=Dupuy, B. |work=Reuters Fact-Checking |date=28 July 2021 |accessdate=18 September 2021}}</ref>


==References==
==References==
{{Reflist|colwidth=30em}}
{{Reflist|colwidth=30em}}

Revision as of 19:30, 3 February 2022

As the pandemic has progressed, you may have heard talk of a "delta" variant of SARS-CoV-2, which is reportedly more contagious and virulent than the initial strain that kicked off the pandemic.[1] One or more variants of a virus are expected as time progresses, and some of those variants can cause significantly more problems than the source virus. As such, analytical testing of the virus over time is vital to public health.

The purpose of variant testing can be described in two ways, one for public health reasons and another for clinical care reasons. On the public health side, analysis of SARS-CoV-2 variants provides an unbiased, population-level view "of the specific viral strains in circulation and monitors changes in the viral genome over time."[2] With enough public health laboratories conducting this type of analysis—typically whole-genome sequencing (WGS) using next-generation sequencing (NGS) techniques—a clearer picture of how an outbreak spreads is gained, as well as what variants are taking hold and further threatening human populations (even those that are vaccinated). This information is typically shared through the public health system for surveillance and reporting purposes, though the affected patients themselves may never see the data.[2]

On the clinical care side, analysis of SARS-CoV-2 variants provides further insights into improving COVID-19 patient outcomes. Buchan et al. identify three potential insights that clinicians may gain, noting that variant testing allows the clinician[2]:

  • to distinguish between an existing, persistent infection caused by one viral strain vs. re-infection by a different viral strain;
  • to determine whether a patient not responding to a treatment is affected by a specific viral spike protein (S) gene mutation that is "potentially resistant or less susceptible to neutralizing antibodies or monoclonal antibodies"; and
  • to detect in the serum or plasma of a patient post-vaccination "viral S gene substitutions in specific variants that are potentially resistant or less susceptible" to the antibodies the vaccine generates.

If, for example, a patient is diagnosed with a variant that is tied to heightened disease severity, the clinician can opt for additional treatments early on to counteract the variant's effects on the patient. This testing is done in a hospital or reference lab by WGS or by targeting a portion of the genome (e.g., a spike protein) or a specific mutation (using RT-PCR). However, according to Buchan et al., the contributions a mutation makes to a "variant's attributes is not entirely understood, and there is no definitive evidence that directly links a given mutation to poor outcomes, significantly reduced efficacy of SARS-CoV-2 therapies, or vaccine coverage."[2]

That said, and leaving the public health element to the side, if you are a laboratory conducting clinical analyses of SARS-CoV-2 specimens, the likelihood of including viral sequencing and sequence analysis for variant testing may be low for your facility. Such testing is a multi-step process requiring a non-trivial set of resources, often available to large commercial diagnostic laboratories.[2][3] The CDC represents one possible workflow for genomic sequencing as such[4]:

  1. A specimen containing the SARS-CoV-2 virus is received by the lab and promptly entered into the laboratory information system (LIS).
  2. The RNA of the SARS-CoV-2 virus is extracted from the sample and then converted to complimentary DNA. It is then enriched and loaded into the appropriate NGS instrument.
  3. The instrument runs the sequencing and raw data is collected, with the lab maintaining quality control steps. The raw data is turned into actionable sequence data.
  4. The sequence data is verified for suitability, with a resequencing occurring if found to be inadequate. Otherwise, the data is then analyzed and interpreted.
  5. The final approved sequencing results are reported to the appropriate state, local, tribal, or territorial public health department.[5]

If your diagnostic lab has or is planning on adding sequencing tools to supplement clinical diagnostics, it may make sense to consider adding variant testing to your available options. But in reality, this sort of testing may largely be left to large institutions, such as the University of Rochester Vaccine Treatment Evaluation Unit or the Yale School of Public Health.[6]

References

  1. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (26 August 2021). "Delta Variant: What We Know About the Science". Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/variants/delta-variant.html. Retrieved 18 September 2021. 
  2. 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 Buchan, B.W.; Wolk, D.M.; Yao, J.D. (28 April 2021). "SARS-CoV-2 Variant Testing" (PDF). Rapid Communication. Association for Molecular Pathology. https://www.amp.org/AMP/assets/File/clinical-practice/COVID/AMP_RC_VariantTestingforSARSCOV2_4_28_21.pdf. Retrieved 18 September 2021. 
  3. Williams, R.W. (19 February 2021). "Enhancing Public Health Surveillance for Variant SARSCoV-2 Viruses in Missouri" (PDF). Missouri Department of Health & Senior Services. https://health.mo.gov/emergencies/ert/alertsadvisories/pdf/update21921.pdf. Retrieved 18 September 2021. 
  4. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (8 September 2021). "CDC’s Role in Tracking Variants". Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/variants/cdc-role-surveillance.html. Retrieved 18 September 2021. 
  5. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (23 June 2021). "Guidance for Reporting SARS-CoV-2 Sequencing Result". Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/lab/resources/reporting-sequencing-guidance.html. Retrieved 19 September 2021. 
  6. Dupuy, B. (28 July 2021). "COVID-19 variants tested through genome sequencing". Reuters Fact-Checking. https://apnews.com/article/fact-checking-549965482111. Retrieved 18 September 2021.