MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3171859441 · doi:10.1101/2021.06.02.21258097

Rapid and Sensitive Detection of SARS-CoV-2 Infection Using Quantitative Peptide Enrichment LC-MS Analysis

2021· preprint· en· W3171859441 on OpenAlexaff
Andreas Hober, Dominic Foley, Thomas S. McDonald, Johannes P.C. Vissers, Rebecca Pattison, Samantha Ferries, Sigurd Hermansson, Ingvar Betner, Mathias Uhlén, Morteza Razavi, Richard Yip, Matthew E. Pope, Terry W. Pearson, N. Leigh Anderson, Amy Bartlett, Lisa Calton, Jessica J. Alm, Lars Engstrand, Fredrik Edfors

Bibliographic record

VenuemedRxiv · 2021
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSARS-CoV-2 detection and testing
Canadian institutionsCapital Regional District
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)ChromatographyMass spectrometryDetection limitAnalyteLiquid chromatography–mass spectrometrySelected reaction monitoring2019-20 coronavirus outbreakChemistryVirologyMedicineTandem mass spectrometryPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Reliable, robust, large-scale molecular testing for SARS-CoV-2 is essential for monitoring the ongoing Covid-19 pandemic. We have developed a scalable analytical approach to detect viral proteins based on peptide immunoaffinity enrichment combined with liquid chromatography - mass spectrometry (LC-MS). This is a multiplexed strategy, based on targeted proteomics analysis and read-out by LC-MS, capable of precisely quantifying and confirming the presence of SARS-CoV-2 in PBS swab media from combined throat/nasopharynx/saliva samples. The results reveal that the levels of SARS-CoV-2 measured by LC-MS correlate well with their corresponding RT-PCR readout (r=0.79). The analytical workflow shows similar turnaround times as regular RT-PCR instrumentation with a quantitative readout of viral proteins corresponding to cycle thresholds (Ct) equivalents ranging from 21 to 34. Using RT-PCR as a reference, we demonstrate that the LC-MS-based method has 100% negative percent agreement (estimated specificity) and 95% positive percent agreement (estimated sensitivity) when analyzing clinical samples collected from asymptomatic individuals with a Ct within the limit of detection of the mass spectrometer (Ct ≤30). These results suggest that a scalable analytical method based on LC-MS has a place in future pandemic preparedness centers to complement current virus detection technologies.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.088
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.262 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations5
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuemedRxivSame topicSARS-CoV-2 detection and testingFrench-language works237,207