Correction to: Discrimination of False Negative Results in RT-PCR Detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNAs in Clinical Specimens by Using an Internal Reference

Correction to: Virologica Sinica (2020) https://doi.org/10.1007/s12250-020-00273-8

In the original version of Fig. 4I and 4J, the cutoff lines were accidently shifted during figure layout. Figures 4I and 4J are re-drawn and provided below.

Fig. 4

The RT-PCR detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNAs in 181 sputum and throat swab specimens from 20 patients with conflicting RT-PCR results. 109 paired sputum (A) and 72 throat swab (B) specimens were collected and subjected to SARS-CoV-2 specific RT-PCR assays targeting the ORF1ab and N regions. +: RT-PCR positive; −: RT-PCR negative. Pearson correlation coefficients for the levels of detected SARS-CoV-2 RNA (based on the assays for ORF1ab and N region) and RPP30 RNAs in patient samples were calculated. For sputum specimens: C ORF1ab and N region; D ORF1ab and RPP30; E N region and RPP30. For throat swab specimens: F ORF1ab and N region; G ORF1ab and RPP30; H N region and RPP30. The Ct values of RPP30 RT-PCR were used to analyze the positive and negative results of ORF1ab and N-specific RT-PCR assays with 109 sputum (I) and 72 throat swab (J) specimens. Pos: positive results; Neg: negative results. The negative RT-PCR results of SARS-CoV-2 detection correspond to high Ct values for RT-PCR for RPP30 RNAs. Red lines: cutoffs for ORF1ab RT-PCR; blue lines: cutoffs for N specific RT-PCR. The results were tested for significance by using the Mann–Whitney test (I, J). A P value of < 0.05 is considered as significant.