{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.04241552839683681, 'fraction_numerical': 0.026599568655643422, 'mean_word_length': 4.681632653061224, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Sensitivity Comparison of Different Methods Used for RNA Extraction with Increasing Capacity for the Detection of COVID-19

The emergence of a novel corona virus was seen in the human population since December 2019. The Covid-19 is posing a major burden on society. Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Corona Virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has since spread across the globe. Thus, early and correct diagnosis is very crucial to reduce its spread. So, most sensitive and specific method available to diagnose the Covid-19 is real-time reverse transcriptase PCR (qRT-PCR). A better qRT-PCR result depends on the quality of the extracted RNA.
Recently, many commercial kits have become available for extraction of RNA from specimens. The goal of this study was to compare robustness or clinical performance of manual kits available to us (i) MDI Viral RNA Extraction Mini-prep Kit and 2 automated extraction systems such as (i) MagNA Pure 24 Roche (ii) Nextactor NX-48 Genolution. We used 48 pre-examined nasopharyngeal and oropharyngeal swab samples with low, medium and high cycle threshold (Ct) values for this study and extraction was done in pooling of 1:5, 1:6, 1:7, 1:8, 1:9, 1:10.
Through this work, we conclude that MagNA Pure 24 Roche and MDI Viral RNA Extraction Mini-prep kit showed better result as compared to Nextactor NX-48 Genolution.

Keywords: SARS-CoV-2, qRT-PCR, Extraction, Diagnosis.