Clinical Evaluation of Rapid RNA Test for Covid-19 (CERrnaTc-19)

April 1, 2022 updated by: University of Southampton
A new Rapid RNA test for Covid-19 has been developed by Professor Cui and his team at the Department of Engineering Science at the University of Oxford. This can give results in 30 minutes which is much faster than the routine PCR test, which often takes 2-3 days to produce results. In this study we aim to establish the sensitivity of the rapid RNA test, which has never before been evaluated clinically. Preliminary anecdotal evidence suggests that the test is easy to use and appears to give valid results. This initial trial aims to establish whether the sensitivity of this tests is above the threshold of 90%. We aim to include at least 173 patients with symptoms of Covid-19 in Watford General Hospital.

Study Overview

Status

Completed

Conditions

Detailed Description

Rapid, accurate diagnosis of Covid-19 would greatly help to improve clinical management of patients presenting with symptoms of possible Covid-19. Currently, results of the standard test for the virus take 2-3 days to be reported. The University of Oxford Institute of Biomedical Engineering has designed a new test, which can produce results in 30 minutes. This uses a nasal/throat swab like the current standard test.

In the first phase of the trial, the swab was sent to the laboratory in a dry tube. In the laboratory, the swab was put into a vial of 1 mL water, and a small amount (25 µL) of the water was put into a test tube. This test tube contained materials which can detect the presence of the novel Coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2). The test tube is then simply warmed to 65°C for 30 minutes, and if the Coronavirus is present, the reagent will change colour from pink to yellow (positive). If there is no virus present in the sample, the colour remains pink (negative). This is designed to be a very simple test that does not need specialist skills or equipment, and so could be carried out in hospitals and even in primary care. In this study we aimed to evaluate the accuracy of this new test. We planned to take a second swab from patients with suspected Covid-19 at Watford General hospital (who were being tested anyway) and to use these swabs to conduct the new test (in ideal laboratory conditions) as well as the standard test. As we were not sure of the accuracy of the new test, its results were not used to make decisions about treatment for the patient. In the initial cohort of 173 patients, Discrepancies were noted with some samples when compared to reference lab results. We then investigated whether the patients who had a positive rapid RNA test, but a negative "gold standard" test, were true positives, by inviting them to have an antibody test. This revealed that 20 of 161 patients with a negative reference test had a false positive result on the rapid test. These false positives may result from interfering substances in the clinical samples, which affect the colorimetric detection based on pH changes.

In view of these first results and feedback, the Oxford team made a number of modifications to the rapid test:

  1. Viral inactivation - the swab is placed in saline and heated at 95°C for 5 mins - which kills the virus and makes it safe to use at the point of care
  2. The sample is diluted 1 in 10 to avoid interaction with saliva
  3. A "molecular switch" was added to avoid false positives.

The diagnostic accuracy of the modified test was then evaluated. We invited patients who were being screened, and patients who had been screened and found to be positive, to take part in this study. As the prevalence of COVID-19 amongst tested patients was lower than we had estimated when calculating the sample size (only 12 of 173 were positive on the reference test), the sample was increased by a further 300 patients. We aimed to discover rapidly whether the modified test is accurate.

The rapid RNA test has the potential to be a useful screening tool if it acquires comparable sensitivity to the current "gold standard" with a rapid and feasible approach.

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Actual)

369

Phase

  • Not Applicable

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Locations

    • Hertfordshire
      • Watford, Hertfordshire, United Kingdom, WD18 0HB
        • Watford General Hospital

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Ages Eligible for Study

18 years and older (ADULT, OLDER_ADULT)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Genders Eligible for Study

All

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  1. Patients presenting to hospital with symptoms of Covid-19 OR who are asymptomatic but being screened for Covid-19 (including in hospital and drive-through testing centres)
  2. Age 18 or over
  3. Swab is being taken for standard PCR test of Covid-19
  4. Willing and able to give written informed consent

Exclusion Criteria:

  1. Lack of written consent
  2. Age under 18
  3. Routine PCR test not being conducted

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Primary Purpose: DIAGNOSTIC
  • Allocation: NON_RANDOMIZED
  • Interventional Model: SEQUENTIAL
  • Masking: NONE

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
OTHER: Phase 1

Version 1 of the rapid test:

The clinician taking the nasopharyngeal / oropharyngeal swab for standard PCR testing for Covid-19 collected a second swab directly afterwards for the rapid RNA test. The swab was placed in a dry tube, labelled with the patient's ID, date and time of taking the sample, and was taken to the microbiology laboratory for processing.

In the laboratory, 2ml of RNase-free water was added to the tube and shaken with the swab. Twenty-five microlitres of the swab solution was transferred into a PCR tube containing the dried reagents for the rapid RNA test. This tube was then incubated for 45 minutes at 65'C, then taken out to cool down. The colour of the tube was recorded by the laboratory technician.

rapid RT-LAMP test to detect SARS-COV-2 RNA
OTHER: Phase 2

Version 2 of the rapid test:

The clinician taking the nasopharyngeal / oropharyngeal swab for standard PCR testing for Covid-19 collected a second swab directly afterwards for the rapid RNA test. The swab was placed in a tube containing 1ml of normal saline (instead of a dry tube). If the patient was eligible but the standard swab had already been taken >12 hours before, we asked them for their consent to take a second standard swab alongside the swab for the rapid RNA test, to ensure that the samples were comparable.

In the laboratory, the swab was heated to 95'C for 5 minutes to inactivate the virus. Nine ml of RNase-free water was added to the tube and shaken with the swab, before transferring 25ul of the swab solution into the PCR tube containing the dried reagents. This tube was then incubated for 30 minutes at 65'C, then the colour of the tube was recorded and photographed by the laboratory technician at 30 minutes (primary reading) and 45 minutes (secondary reading).

rapid RT-LAMP test to detect SARS-COV-2 RNA

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Sensitivity and specificity compared to standard PCR
Time Frame: within 12 hours
Test swab taken within 12 hours of the standard PCR swab
within 12 hours

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start (ACTUAL)

May 27, 2020

Primary Completion (ACTUAL)

February 27, 2021

Study Completion (ACTUAL)

February 27, 2021

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

March 25, 2022

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

April 1, 2022

First Posted (ACTUAL)

April 4, 2022

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (ACTUAL)

April 4, 2022

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

April 1, 2022

Last Verified

April 1, 2022

More Information

Terms related to this study

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?

NO

Drug and device information, study documents

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product

No

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product

No

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Clinical Trials on COVID-19

Clinical Trials on rapid RT-LAMP test to detect SARS-COV-2 RNA

Subscribe