Abstract
BACKGROUND The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic has significantly increased demand on laboratory throughput and reagents for nucleic acid extraction and polymerase chain reaction (PCR). Reagent shortages may limit the expansion of testing required to scale back isolation measures. AIM To investigate the viability of sample pooling as a strategy for increasing test throughput and conserving PCR reagents; to report our early experience with pooling of clinical samples. METHODS A pre-implementation study was performed to assess the sensitivity and theoretical efficiency of two, four, and eight-sample pools in a real-time reverse transcription PCR-based workflow. A standard operating procedure was developed and implemented in two laboratories during periods of peak demand, inclusive of over 29,000 clinical samples processed in our laboratory. RESULTS Sensitivity decreased (mean absolute increase in cycle threshold value of 0.6, 2.3, and 3.0 for pools of two, four, and eight samples respectively) and efficiency increased as pool size increased. Gains from pooling diminished at high disease prevalence. Our standard operating procedure was successfully implemented across two laboratories. Increased workflow complexity imparts a higher risk of errors, and requires risk mitigation strategies. Turnaround time for individual samples increased, hence urgent samples should not be pooled. CONCLUSIONS Pooling is a viable strategy for high-throughput testing of SARS-CoV-2 in low-prevalence settings.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
VIDRL's funding for public health laboratory testing for Victoria is provided by the Victorian Department of Health and Human Services. No additional funding was received for the purposes of this study.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
Melbourne Health Human Research Ethics Committee - ethical approval is not required for publishing reports of laboratory testing protocols/workflows.
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
No further data is available online.
