Dies ist eine Übersichtsseite mit Metadaten zu dieser wissenschaftlichen Arbeit. Der vollständige Artikel ist beim Verlag verfügbar.
External peer review of the RTPCR test to detect SARS-CoV-2 reveals 10 major scientific flaws at the molecular and methodological level: consequences for false positive results.
13
Zitationen
22
Autoren
2020
Jahr
Abstract
In the publication entitled “Detection of 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) by real-time RT-PCR” (Eurosurveillance 25(8) 2020) the authors present a diagnostic workflow and RT-qPCR protocol for detection and diagnostics of 2019-nCoV (now known as SARS-CoV-2), which they claim to be validated, as well as being a robust diagnostic methodology for use in public-health laboratory settings. In light of all the consequences resulting from this very publication for societies worldwide, a group of independent researchers performed a point-by-point review of the aforesaid publication in which 1) all components of the presented test design were cross checked, 2) the RT-qPCR protocol-recommendations were assesses w.r.t. good laboratory practice, and 3) parameters examined against relevant scientific literature covering the field. The published RT-qPCR protocol for detection and diagnostics of 2019-nCoV and the manuscript suffer from numerous technical and scientific errors, including insufficient primer design, a problematic and insufficient RT-qPCR protocol, and the absence of an accurate test validation. Neither the presented test nor the manuscript itself fulfils the requirements for an acceptable scientific publication. Further, serious conflicts of interest of the authors are not mentioned. Finally, the very short timescale between submission and acceptance of the publication (24 hours) signifies that a systematic peer review process was either not performed here, or of problematic poor quality. We provide compelling evidence of several scientific inadequacies, errors and flaws.<br> <br> Considering the scientific and methodological blemishes presented here, we are confident that the editorial board of Eurosurveillance has no other choice but to retract the publication.
Ähnliche Arbeiten
Cryo-EM structure of the 2019-nCoV spike in the prefusion conformation
2020 · 9.691 Zit.
Detection of 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) by real-time RT-PCR
2020 · 8.121 Zit.
The proximal origin of SARS-CoV-2
2020 · 5.485 Zit.
Detection of SARS-CoV-2 in Different Types of Clinical Specimens
2020 · 5.331 Zit.
SARS-CoV-2 Viral Load in Upper Respiratory Specimens of Infected Patients
2020 · 5.169 Zit.
Autoren
- Pieter Borger
- Bobby Rajesh Malhotra
- Michael Yeadon
- Clare Craig
- Kevin McKernan
- K. Steger
- Paul M.J. McSheehy
- Lidiya Angelova
- Fabio Franchi
- Thomas Binder
- Henrik Ullrich
- Makoto Ohashi
- Stefano Scoglio
- Marjolein Doesburg-van Kleffens
- Dorothea Gilbert
- Rainer J. Klement
- Ruth Schrüfer
- Berber W. Pieksma
- Jan Bonte
- Bruno H. Dalle Carbonare
- Kevin P. Corbett
- Ulrike Kämmer
Institutionen
- Wilhelm Löhe University for Applied Sciences(DE)
- University of Applied Arts Vienna(AT)
- PA Consulting Group(GB)
- NewPath Research(US)
- ID Genomics (United States)(US)
- University of Giessen(DE)
- American Pharmacists Association(US)
- National Cooperative for the Disposal of Radioactive Waste (Switzerland)(CH)
- University Hospital Ulm(DE)
- Tokushima University(JP)
- Nutrition 21 (United States)(US)
- Maaslandziekenhuis(NL)
- RED Consulting (Norway)(NO)
- Leopoldina Krankenhaus Schweinfurt(DE)
- Institute of Human Genetics(PL)
- General Practitioners Research Institute(NL)
- The Neurological Institute(US)
- Freiwillige Akademische Gesellschaft(CH)
- Universitätsklinikum Würzburg(DE)