2022
DOI: 10.1016/j.bios.2021.113759
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Rapid detection of novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 by RT-LAMP coupled solid-state nanopores

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

2
22
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

2
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 24 publications
(24 citation statements)
references
References 36 publications
2
22
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Comparing our results on sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV with those obtained in previous studies, we found that the specificity and PPV values of the RT-LAMP-CRISPR-Cas13a technology were higher than those from 7 out of 10 RT-LAMP papers reviewed [19][20][21][22][23][24][25] and in one case the sensitivity of the novel technique was even higher [18]. Moreover, this technique showed higher sensitivity and NPV values than those from 2 out of 10 RT-LAMP-CRISPR papers reviewed which applied RNA extraction kit on the clinical samples [33,35].…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 74%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Comparing our results on sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV with those obtained in previous studies, we found that the specificity and PPV values of the RT-LAMP-CRISPR-Cas13a technology were higher than those from 7 out of 10 RT-LAMP papers reviewed [19][20][21][22][23][24][25] and in one case the sensitivity of the novel technique was even higher [18]. Moreover, this technique showed higher sensitivity and NPV values than those from 2 out of 10 RT-LAMP-CRISPR papers reviewed which applied RNA extraction kit on the clinical samples [33,35].…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 74%
“…First, we conducted a search in PubMed with "qPCR diagnosis COVID19" as keywords and compared the output with the number of publications on RT-LAMP and RT-LAMP-CRISPR strategies for COVID-19 diagnosis [15]. Finally, we collected data on the different sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) from 10 papers related to RT-LAMP and 10 papers on the RT-LAMP-CRISPR-Cas COVID19 diagnostic technique [16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34][35]. We used the results to calculate the parameters needed for the comparison.…”
Section: Study Of the State Of The Artmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The integration of the CRISPR-Cas12a and nucleic acid amplification techniques has been proved by several works. 22,60,63–65 These results demonstrated that our nanopore sensor using a DNA tetrahedron as a signal transducer based on the CRISPR-Cas12a conversion mechanism could detect targets specifically, which we believe could become a promising alternative to biomolecular detection.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 74%
“…After dispensing the sample, the real-time RT-LAMP reaction starts at a constant temperature of ∼64 °C. 41 The acquired fluorescence data are transmitted to the smartphone app every 5 s. The threshold to distinguish the positive from the negative was set at 50 RFU based on the no template control (NTC) samples tested ( Supporting Information Figure S5 ). We classify a sample as positive only when two out of three reactions have a higher RFU than the threshold value in 30 min.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…After validating all of the subsystems and system integration, we went out to test the performance of the SLIDE. Here, we used our previously validated SARS-CoV-2 RT-LAMP primer set 41 ( Supporting Information Table S1 ) against the highly conserved N region with a modified fluorescent concentration of SYTO9 ( Supporting Information Table S2 ). We formed mock SARS-CoV-2 positive samples by spiking the healthy saliva with different concentrations of heat-inactivated SARS-CoV-2 virus particles.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%