TY - JOUR
T1 - Agreement and differential use of laboratory methods for the detection and quantification of SARS-CoV-2 in experimentally infected animals
AU - Usai, Carla
AU - Pailler-Garcia, Lola
AU - Lorca-Oro, Cristina
AU - Fernandez-Bastit, Leira
AU - Roca, Nuria
AU - Brustolin, Marco
AU - Rodon, Jordi
AU - Perez, Monica
AU - Cantero, Guillermo
AU - Carrillo, Jorge
AU - Izquierdo-Useros, Nuria
AU - Blanco, Julia
AU - Clotet, Bonaventura
AU - Napp, Sebastian
AU - Segales, Joaquim
AU - Vergara-Alert, Julia
N1 - FTX; DOAJ; (CC BY 4.0)
PY - 2022
Y1 - 2022
N2 - Rodents are widely used for the development of COVID-19-like animal models, the virological outcome being determined through several laboratory methods reported in the literature. Our objective was to assess the agreement between methods performed on different sample types from 342 rodents experimentally infected with SARS-CoV-2 (289 golden Syrian hamsters and 53 K18-hACE2 mice). Our results showed moderate agreement between methods detecting active viral replication, and that increasing viral loads determined by either RT-qPCR or infectious viral titration corresponded to increasing immunohistochemical scores. The percentage of agreement between methods decreased over experimental time points, and we observed poor agreement between RT-qPCR results and viral titration from oropharyngeal swabs. In conclusion, RT-qPCR and viral titration on tissue homogenates are the most reliable techniques to determine the presence and replication of SARS-CoV-2 in the early and peak phases of infection, and immunohistochemistry is valuable to evaluate viral distribution patterns in the infected tissues.
AB - Rodents are widely used for the development of COVID-19-like animal models, the virological outcome being determined through several laboratory methods reported in the literature. Our objective was to assess the agreement between methods performed on different sample types from 342 rodents experimentally infected with SARS-CoV-2 (289 golden Syrian hamsters and 53 K18-hACE2 mice). Our results showed moderate agreement between methods detecting active viral replication, and that increasing viral loads determined by either RT-qPCR or infectious viral titration corresponded to increasing immunohistochemical scores. The percentage of agreement between methods decreased over experimental time points, and we observed poor agreement between RT-qPCR results and viral titration from oropharyngeal swabs. In conclusion, RT-qPCR and viral titration on tissue homogenates are the most reliable techniques to determine the presence and replication of SARS-CoV-2 in the early and peak phases of infection, and immunohistochemistry is valuable to evaluate viral distribution patterns in the infected tissues.
KW - severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2
KW - RT-qPCR
KW - virus titration
KW - immunohistochemistry
KW - comparison
KW - agreement
KW - tissues
KW - oropharyngeal swab
U2 - 10.3389/fmicb.2022.1016201
DO - 10.3389/fmicb.2022.1016201
M3 - A1: Web of Science-article
SN - 1664-302X
VL - 13
JO - Frontiers in Microbiology
JF - Frontiers in Microbiology
M1 - 1016201
ER -