Dataset Information

Evaluation of two fluorescence immunoassays for the rapid detection of SARS-CoV-2 antigen-new tool to detect infective COVID-19 patients.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Real-Time Reverse-Transcription Polymerase Chain Reaction (RT-PCR) is currently the only recommended diagnostic method for SARS-CoV-2. However, rapid immunoassays for SARS-CoV-2 antigen could significantly reduce the COVID-19 burden currently weighing on laboratories around the world.

Methods

We evaluated the performance of two rapid fluorescence immunoassays (FIAs), SOFIA SARS Antigen FIA (Quidel Corporation, San Diego, CA, USA) and STANDARD F COVID-19 Ag FIA (SD Biosensor Inc., Gyeonggi-do, Republic of Korea), which use an automated reader. The study used 64 RT-PCR characterized clinical samples (32 positive; 32 negative), which consisted of nasopharyngeal swabs in universal transport medium.

Results

Of the 32 positive specimens, all from patients within 5 days of symptom onset, the Quidel and SD Biosensor assays detected 30 (93.8%) and 29 (90.6%) samples, respectively. Among the 27 samples with high viral loads (Ct ? 25), the two tests had a sensitivity of 100%. Specificity was 96.9% for both kits.

Conclusion

The high performance of the evaluated FIAs indicates a potential use as rapid and PCR-independent tools for COVID-19 diagnosis in early stages of infection. The excellent sensitivity to detect cases with viral loads above ~10⁶ copies/mL (Ct values ? 25), the estimated threshold of contagiousness, suggests that the assays might serve to rapidly identify infective individuals.

SUBMITTER: Porte L

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7827970 | biostudies-literature | 2021

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Evaluation of two fluorescence immunoassays for the rapid detection of SARS-CoV-2 antigen-new tool to detect infective COVID-19 patients.

Porte Lorena L Legarraga Paulette P Iruretagoyena Mirentxu M Vollrath Valeska V Pizarro Gabriel G Munita Jose J Araos Rafael R Weitzel Thomas T

PeerJ 20210121

<h4>Background</h4>Real-Time Reverse-Transcription Polymerase Chain Reaction (RT-PCR) is currently the only recommended diagnostic method for SARS-CoV-2. However, rapid immunoassays for SARS-CoV-2 antigen could significantly reduce the COVID-19 burden currently weighing on laboratories around the world.<h4>Methods</h4>We evaluated the performance of two rapid fluorescence immunoassays (FIAs), SOFIA SARS Antigen FIA (Quidel Corporation, San Diego, CA, USA) and STANDARD F COVID-19 Ag FIA (SD Biose ...[more]

PMID: 33552746

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe performance of rapid antigen tests (Ag-RDTs) for screening asymptomatic and symptomatic persons for SARS-CoV-2 is not well established.ObjectiveTo evaluate the performance of Ag-RDTs for detection of SARS-CoV-2 among symptomatic and asymptomatic participants.DesignThis prospective cohort study enrolled participants between October 2021 and January 2022. Participants completed Ag-RDTs and reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) testing for SARS-CoV-2 every 48 hours for 15 days.SettingParticipants were enrolled digitally throughout the mainland United States. They self-collected anterior nasal swabs for Ag-RDTs and RT-PCR testing. Nasal swabs for RT-PCR were shipped to a central laboratory, whereas Ag-RDTs were done at home.ParticipantsOf 7361 participants in the study, 5353 who were asymptomatic and negative for SARS-CoV-2 on study day 1 were eligible. In total, 154 participants had at least 1 positive RT-PCR result.MeasurementsThe sensitivity of Ag-RDTs was measured on the basis of testing once (same-day), twice (after 48 hours), and thrice (after a total of 96 hours). The analysis was repeated for different days past index PCR positivity (DPIPPs) to approximate real-world scenarios where testing initiation may not always coincide with DPIPP 0. Results were stratified by symptom status.ResultsAmong 154 participants who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2, 97 were asymptomatic and 57 had symptoms at infection onset. Serial testing with Ag-RDTs twice 48 hours apart resulted in an aggregated sensitivity of 93.4% (95% CI, 90.4% to 95.9%) among symptomatic participants on DPIPPs 0 to 6. When singleton positive results were excluded, the aggregated sensitivity on DPIPPs 0 to 6 for 2-time serial testing among asymptomatic participants was lower at 62.7% (CI, 57.0% to 70.5%), but it improved to 79.0% (CI, 70.1% to 87.4%) with testing 3 times at 48-hour intervals.LimitationParticipants tested every 48 hours; therefore, these data cannot support conclusions about serial testing intervals shorter than 48 hours.ConclusionThe performance of Ag-RDTs was optimized when asymptomatic participants tested 3 times at 48-hour intervals and when symptomatic participants tested 2 times separated by 48 hours.Primary funding sourceNational Institutes of Health RADx Tech program.

Project description:BackgroundSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) causing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is currently finally determined in laboratory settings by real-time reverse-transcription polymerase-chain-reaction (rt-PCR). However, simple testing with immediately available results are crucial to gain control over COVID-19. The aim was to evaluate such a point-of-care antigen rapid test (AG-rt) device in its performance compared to laboratory-based rt-PCR testing in COVID-19 suspected, symptomatic patients.MethodsFor this prospective study, two specimens each of 541 symptomatic female (54.7%) and male (45.3%) patients aged between 18 and 95 years tested at five emergency departments (ED, n = 296) and four primary healthcare centres (PHC, n = 245), were compared, using AG-rt (positive/negative/invalid) and rt-PCR (positive/negative and cycle threshold, Ct) to diagnose SARS-CoV-2. Diagnostic accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive values (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and likelihood ratios (LR+/-) of the AG-rt were assessed.ResultsDifferences between ED and PHC were detected regarding gender, age, symptoms, disease prevalence, and diagnostic performance. Overall, 174 (32.2%) were tested positive on AG-rt and 213 (39.4%) on rt-PCR. AG correctly classified 91.7% of all rt-PCR positive cases with a sensitivity of 80.3%, specificity of 99.1%, PPV of 98.3, NPV of 88.6%, LR(+) of 87.8, and LR(-) of 0.20. The highest sensitivities and specificities of AG-rt were detected in PHC (sensitivity: 84.4%, specificity: 100.0%), when using Ct of 30 as cut-off (sensitivity: 92.5%, specificity: 97.8%), and when symptom onset was within the first three days (sensitivity: 82.9%, specificity: 99.6%).ConclusionsThe highest sensitivity was detected with a high viral load. Our findings suggest that AG-rt are comparable to rt-PCR to diagnose SARS-CoV-2 in COVID-19 suspected symptomatic patients presenting both at emergency departments and primary health care centres.

Dataset Information

Evaluation of two fluorescence immunoassays for the rapid detection of SARS-CoV-2 antigen-new tool to detect infective COVID-19 patients.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Evaluation of two fluorescence immunoassays for the rapid detection of SARS-CoV-2 antigen-new tool to detect infective COVID-19 patients.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets