1887

Abstract

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the causative agent of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), presents a challenge to laboratorians and healthcare workers around the world. Handling of biological samples from individuals infected with the SARS-CoV-2 virus requires strict biosafety measures. Within the laboratory, non-propagative work with samples containing the virus requires, at minimum, Biosafety Level-2 (BSL-2) techniques and facilities. Therefore, handling of SARS-CoV-2 samples remains a major concern in areas and conditions where biosafety for specimen handling is difficult to maintain, such as in rural laboratories or austere field testing sites. Inactivation through physical or chemical means can reduce the risk of handling live virus and increase testing ability especially in low-resource settings due to easier and faster sample processing. Herein we assess several chemical and physical inactivation techniques employed against SARS-CoV-2 isolates from Cambodia. This data demonstrates that all chemical (AVL, inactivating sample buffer and formaldehyde) and heat-treatment (56 and 98 °C) methods tested completely inactivated viral loads of up to 5 log.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journal/jgv/10.1099/jgv.0.001539
2021-01-08
2021-03-02
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/jgv/10.1099/jgv.0.001539/jgv001539.html?itemId=/content/journal/jgv/10.1099/jgv.0.001539&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. World Health Organization 2020; Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) outbreak. https://www.who.int/westernpacific/emergencies/covid-19 May 13th 2020
  2. Dong E, Du H, Gardner L. An interactive web-based dashboard to track COVID-19 in real time. Lancet Infect Dis 2020; 20: 533 534 [CrossRef] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  3. United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Interim laboratory biosafety guidelines for handling and processing specimens associated with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). 2020
  4. World Health Organization Laboratory testing for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in suspected human cases: interim guidance. 2 March 2020; 2020:
    [Google Scholar]
  5. United Nations Un list of least developed countries. 2019
  6. Burgos S, Ear S. Emerging infectious diseases and public health policy: insights from Cambodia, Hong Kong and Indonesia. Transbound Emerg Dis 2015; 62: 96 101 [CrossRef] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Flint SJE W, Racaniello VR, Skalka AM. Virological Methods. Principles of Virology ASM Press; 2009
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Ramakrishnan MA. Determination of 50% endpoint titer using a simple formula. World J Virol 2016; 5: 85 86 [CrossRef] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Corman VM, Landt O, Kaiser M, Molenkamp R, Meijer A et al. Detection of 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) by real-time RT-PCR. Eurosurveillance 2020; 25: 2000045 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1986; 1: 307 310 [CrossRef] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Pastorino B, Touret F, Gilles M, Lamballerie de X, Charrel RN. Evaluation of heating and chemical protocols for inactivating SARS-CoV-2. bioRxiv 2020
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Scallan MF, Dempsey C, MacSharry J, O’Callaghan I, O’Connor PM. Validation of a lysis buffer containing 4 M guanidinium thiocyanate (GITC)/ Triton X-100 for extraction of SARS-CoV-2 RNA for COVID-19 testing: comparison of formulated lysis buffers containing 4 to 6 M GITC. oRxiv 2020
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Welch SR, Davies KA, Buczkowski H, Hettiarachchi N, Green N et al. Analysis of inactivation of SARS-CoV-2 by specimen transport media, nucleic acid extraction reagents, detergents, and fixatives. J Clin Microbiol 2020; 58: e01713 01720 [CrossRef] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Patterson EI, Prince T, Anderson ER, Casas-Sanchez A, Smith SL et al. Methods of inactivation of SARS-CoV-2 for downstream biological assays. J Infect Dis 2020; 222: 1462 1467 [CrossRef] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Jureka AS, Silvas JA, Basler CF. Propagation, inactivation, and safety testing of SARS-CoV-2. Viruses 2020; 12: 622 [CrossRef] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Pastorino B, Touret F, Gilles M, de Lamballerie X, Charrel RN. Heat inactivation of different types of SARS-CoV-2 samples: what protocols for biosafety, molecular detection and serological diagnostics?. Viruses 2020; 12: 735 [CrossRef] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Smither SJ, Weller SA, Phelps A, Eastaugh L, Ngugi S et al. Buffer AVL alone does not inactivate Ebola virus in a representative clinical sample type. J Clin Microbiol 2015; 53: 3148 3154 [CrossRef] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Darnell MER, Subbarao K, Feinstone SM, Taylor DR. Inactivation of the coronavirus that induces severe acute respiratory syndrome, SARS-CoV. J Virol Methods 2004; 121: 85 91 [CrossRef] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Blow JA, Dohm DJ, Negley DL, Mores CN. Virus inactivation by nucleic acid extraction reagents. J Virol Methods 2004; 119: 195 198 [CrossRef] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Ngo KA, Jones SA, Church TM, Fuschino ME, George KS et al. Unreliable inactivation of viruses by commonly used lysis buffers. Applied Biosafety 2017; 22: 56 59 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Sabbaghi A, Miri SM, Keshavarz M, Zargar M, Ghaemi A. Inactivation methods for whole influenza vaccine production. Rev Med Virol 2019; 29: e2074 [CrossRef] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Salk JE, Krech U, Youngner JS, Bennett BL, Lewis LJ et al. Formaldehyde treatment and safety testing of experimental poliomyelitis vaccines. Am J Public Health Nations Health 1954; 44: 563 570 [CrossRef] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Henwood AF. Coronavirus disinfection in histopathology. J Histotechnol 2020; 43: 102 104 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Kampf G, Todt D, Pfaender S, Steinmann E. Persistence of coronaviruses on inanimate surfaces and their inactivation with biocidal agents. J Hosp Infect 2020; 104: 246 251 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Evers DL, Fowler CB, Cunningham BR, Mason JT, O'Leary TJ. The effect of formaldehyde fixation on RNA: optimization of formaldehyde adduct removal. J Mol Diagn 2011; 13: 282 288 [CrossRef] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Batéjat C, Grassin Q, Manuguerra J-C, Leclercq I. Heat inactivation of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. bioRxiv 2020
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Kampf G, Voss A, Scheithauer S. Inactivation of coronaviruses by heat. J Hosp Infect 2020; 105: 348 349 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Lista M, Page R, Sertkaya H, Matos P, Ortiz-Zapater E. Resilient SARS-CoV-2 diagnostics workflows including viral heat inactivation. 2020
  29. Péré H, Podglajen I, Baillard J-L, Mboumba Bouassa R-S, Veyer D et al. Thermal inactivation and nucleic acid amplification-based testing for SARS-CoV-2. J Clin Virol 2020; 131: 104588 [CrossRef] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Leclercq I, Batéjat C, Burguière AM, Manuguerra J-C. Heat inactivation of the middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus. Influenza Other Respir Viruses 2014; 8: 585 586 [CrossRef] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Wu Z-G, Zheng H-Y, Gu J, Li F, Lv R-L, Z-g W, H-y Z, R-l L et al. Effects of different temperature and time durations of virus inactivation on results of real-time fluorescence PCR testing of COVID-19 viruses. Curr Med Sci 2020; 40: 614 617 [CrossRef] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Wang Y, Song W, Zhao Z, Chen P, Liu J et al. The impacts of viral inactivating methods on quantitative RT-PCR for COVID-19. Virus Res 2020; 285: 197988 [CrossRef] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Grant PR, Turner MA, Shin GY, Nastouli E, Levett LJ. Extraction-free COVID-19 (SARS-CoV-2) diagnosis by RT-PCR to increase capacity for national testing programmes during a pandemic. bioRxiv 2020
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Fomsgaard AS, Rosenstierne MW. An alternative workflow for molecular detection of SARS-CoV-2 - escape from the NA extraction kit-shortage, Copenhagen, Denmark, March 2020. Euro Surveill 2020; 25: [CrossRef] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Pan Y, Long L, Zhang D, Yuan T, Cui S et al. Potential false-negative nucleic acid testing results for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 from thermal inactivation of samples with low viral loads. Clin Chem 2020; 66: 794 801 [CrossRef] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Zou J, Zhi S, Chen M, Su X, Kang L et al. Heat inactivation decreases the qualitative real-time RT-PCR detection rates of clinical samples with high cycle threshold values in COVID-19. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis 2020; 98: 115109 [CrossRef] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Chen H, Wu R, Xing Y, Du Q, Xue Z et al. Influence of different inactivation methods on severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 RNA copy number. J Clin Microbiol 2020; 58: e00958 00920 [CrossRef] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journal/jgv/10.1099/jgv.0.001539
Loading
/content/journal/jgv/10.1099/jgv.0.001539
Loading

Data & Media loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error