Advertisement
Mayo Clinic Proceedings Home

Low Utility of Repeat Real-Time PCR Testing for SARS-CoV-2 in Clinical Specimens

      Abstract

      In a multicenter cohort of 22,315 patients tested for COVID-19, 1676 (7.5%) had repeat testing via real-time polymerase chain reaction following an initial negative test. Of those retested within 7 days of their first negative test, only 2.0% had a positive result. This suggests that repeat testing from the same source is unlikely to provide additional information.

      Abbreviations and Acronyms:

      COVID-19 (coronavirus disease 2019), IQR (interquartile range), RT-PCR (reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction), SARS-CoV-2 (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2)
      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to Mayo Clinic Proceedings
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • Fang Y.
        • Zhang H.
        • Xie J.
        • et al.
        Sensitivity of chest CT for COVID-19: comparison to RT-PCR. Radiology. 2020. Feb 19; 200432.
        ([Epub ahead of print])
        • Winichakoon P.
        • Chaiwarith R.
        • Liwsrisakun C.
        • et al.
        Negative nasopharyngeal and oropharyngeal swab does not rule out COVID-19.
        J Clin Microbiol. 2020; 57: e00297-e00320
        • West C.P.
        • Montori V.M.
        • Sampathkumar P.
        COVID-19 testing: the threat of false-negative results.
        Mayo Clin Proc. 2020; 95: 1127-1129
        • He X.
        • Lau E.H.Y.
        • Wu P.
        • et al.
        Temporal dynamics in viral shedding and transmissibility of COVID-19. Nat Med. 2020: [Epub ahead of print].
        (Available at:)
        • Zou L.
        • Ruan F.
        • Huang M.
        • et al.
        SARS-CoV-2 viral load in upper respiratory specimens of infected patients.
        N Engl J Med. 2020; 382: 1177-1179
        • Pan Y.
        • Zhang D.
        • Yang P.
        • Poon L.L.M.
        • Wang Q.
        Viral load of SARS-CoV-2 in clinical samples.
        Lancet Infect Dis. 2020; 20: 411-412
        • Liu Y.
        • Yan L.-M.
        • Wan L.
        • et al.
        Viral dynamics in mild and severe cases of COVID-19.
        Lancet Infect Dis. 2020; 20: 656-657
        • Rodino K.G.
        • Espy M.J.
        • Buckwalter S.P.
        • et al.
        Evaluation of saline, phosphate buffered saline and minimum essential medium as potential alternatives to viral transport media for SARS-CoV-2 testing.
        J Clin Microbiol. 2020; 58: e00590-e00620
        • Lin C.
        • Xiang J.
        • Yan M.
        • Li H.
        • Huang S.
        • Shen C.
        Comparison of throat swabs and sputum specimens for viral nucleic acid detection in 52 cases of novel coronavirus (SARS-Cov-2)-infected pneumonia (COVID-19).
        Clin Chem Lab Med. 2020; 58: 1089-1094

      Linked Article

      • In Reply—Repeated Testing in SARS-CoV-2 Infection
        Mayo Clinic ProceedingsVol. 95Issue 10
        • Preview
          We appreciate the points raised by Lippi et al regarding our article describing repeated testing for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection.1 In summary, the authors emphasize that repeated testing may be helpful in improving the negative predictive value of testing and ensuring that cases of COVID-19 are identified. The authors include evidence supporting the conclusion that identification of the SARS-CoV-2 virus is directly related to the number of nasopharyngeal swabs that are collected and also emphasize the importance of case-finding in control of the pandemic.
        • Full-Text
        • PDF
      • Repeated Testing in SARS-CoV-2 Infection
        Mayo Clinic ProceedingsVol. 95Issue 10
        • Preview
          In a recently published article in the journal, Challener et al1 showed that 2.0% of participants (ie, 22 of 1113) tested positive within 1 week of the first negative nasopharyngeal swab for identification of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. This evidence persuaded the authors to conclude that repeating an identical test in a low-prevalence environment is unlikely to generate added clinical value. However, some important considerations would lead us to disagree with this conclusion.
        • Full-Text
        • PDF