MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3086856639 · doi:10.1101/2020.09.11.292730

In silico prediction of COVID-19 test efficiency with DinoKnot

2020· preprint· en· W3086856639 on OpenAlexaff
Tara Newman, Hiu Fung Kevin Chang, Hosna Jabbari

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2020
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicRNA and protein synthesis mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrimer (cosmetics)In silicoComputational biologyNucleic acidRNAGenomeReverse transcriptaseBiologyPrimer binding siteCoronavirusGeneticsSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)DNADuplex (building)Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)GeneChemistryMedicineInfectious disease (medical specialty)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is a novel coronavirus spreading across the world causing the disease COVID-19. The diagnosis of COVID-19 is done by quantitative reverse-transcription polymer chain reaction (qRT-PCR) testing which utilizes different primer-probe sets depending on the assay used. Using in silico analysis we aimed to determine how the secondary structure of the SARS-CoV-2 RNA genome affects the interaction between the reverse primer during qRT-PCR and how it relates to the experimental primer-probe test efficiencies. We introduce the program DinoKnot (Duplex Interaction of Nucleic acids with pseudoKnots) that follows the hierarchical folding hypothesis to predict the secondary structure of two interacting nucleic acid strands (DNA/RNA) of similar or different type. DinoKnot is the first program that utilizes stable stems in both strands as a guide to find the structure of their interaction. Using DinoKnot we predicted the interaction of the reverse primers used in four common COVID-19 qRT-PCR tests with the SARS-CoV-2 RNA genome. In addition, we predicted how 12 mutations in the primer/probe binding region may affect the primer/probe ability and subsequent SARS-CoV-2 detection. While we found all reverse primers are capable of interacting with their target area, we identified partial mismatching between the SARS-CoV-2 genome and some reverse primers. We predicted three mutations that may prevent primer binding, reducing the ability for SARS-CoV-2 detection. We believe our contributions can aid in the design of a more sensitive SARS-CoV-2 test. Author summary The current testing for the disease COVID-19 that is caused by the novel cornonavirus SARS-CoV-2 uses oligonucleotides called primers that bind to specific target regions on the SARS-CoV-2 genome to detect the virus. Our goal was to use computational tools to predict how the structure of the SARS-CoV-2 RNA genome affects the ability of the primers to bind to their target region. We introduce the program DinoKnot (Duplex interaction of nucleic acids with pseudoknots) that is able to predict the interactions between two DNA or RNA molecules. We used DinoKnot to predict the efficiency of four common COVID-19 tests, and the effect of mutations in the SARS-CoV-2 virus on ability of the COVID-19 tests in detecting those strains. We predict partial mismatching between some primers and the SARS-CoV-2 genome but that all primers are capable of interacting with their target areas. We also predict three mutations that prevent primer binding and thus SARS-CoV-2 detection. We discuss the limitations of the current COVID-19 testing and suggest the design of a more sensitive COVID-19 test that can be aided by our findings.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.209 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)→Same topicRNA and protein synthesis mechanisms→French-language works237,207→