Dataset Information

Validation of a rapid SARS-CoV-2 antibody test in general practice.

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

To validate a rapid serological test (RST) for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies used in seroprevalence studies in healthcare providers, including primary healthcare providers (PHCPs) in Belgium.

Design

A phase III validation study of the RST (OrientGene) within a prospective cohort study.

Setting

Primary care in Belgium.

Participants

Any general practitioner (GP) working in primary care in Belgium and any other PHCP from the same GP practice who physically manages patients were eligible in the seroprevalence study. For the validation study, all participants who tested positive (376) on the RST at the first testing timepoint (T1) and a random sample of those who tested negative (790) and unclear (24) were included.

Intervention

At T2, 4 weeks later, PHCPs performed the RST with fingerprick blood (index test) immediately after providing a serum sample to be analysed for the presence of SARS-CoV-2 immunoglobulin G antibodies using a two-out-of-three assay (reference test).

Primary and secondary outcome measures

The RST accuracy was estimated using inverse probability weighting to correct for missing reference test data, and considering unclear RST results as negative for the sensitivity and positive for the specificity. Using these conservative estimates, the true seroprevalence was estimated both for T2 and RST-based prevalence values found in a cohort study with PHCPs in Belgium.

Results

1073 paired tests (403 positive on the reference test) were included. A sensitivity of 73% (a specificity of 92%) was found considering unclear RST results as negative (positive). For an RST-based prevalence at T1 (13.9), T2 (24.9) and T7 (70.21), the true prevalence was estimated to be 9.1%, 25.9% and 95.7%, respectively.

Conclusion

The RST sensitivity (73%) and specificity (92%) make an RST-based seroprevalence below (above) 23% overestimate (underestimate) the true seroprevalence.

Trial registration number

NCT04779424.

SUBMITTER: Domen J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC10163333 | biostudies-literature | 2023 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Validation of a rapid SARS-CoV-2 antibody test in general practice.

Domen Julie J Verbakel Jan Yvan Jos JYJ Adriaenssens Niels N Scholtes Beatrice B Peeters Bart B Bruyndonckx Robin R De Sutter An A Heytens Stefan S Van den Bruel Ann A Desombere Isabelle I Van Damme Pierre P Goossens Herman H Buret Laetitia L Duysburgh Els E Coenen Samuel S

BMJ open 20230502 5

<h4>Objectives</h4>To validate a rapid serological test (RST) for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies used in seroprevalence studies in healthcare providers, including primary healthcare providers (PHCPs) in Belgium.<h4>Design</h4>A phase III validation study of the RST (OrientGene) within a prospective cohort study.<h4>Setting</h4>Primary care in Belgium.<h4>Participants</h4>Any general practitioner (GP) working in primary care in Belgium and any other PHCP from the same GP practice who physically manages pa ...[more]

PMID: 37130685

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundPCR testing is considered the gold standard for SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis but its results are earliest available hours to days after testing. Rapid antigen tests represent a diagnostic tool enabling testing at the point of care. Rapid antigen tests have mostly been validated by the manufacturer or in controlled laboratory settings only. External validation at the point of care, particularly in general practice where the test is frequently used, is needed. Furthermore, it is unclear how well point of care tests are accepted by the practice staff.MethodsIn this prospective multicenter validation study in primary care, general practitioners included adult individuals presenting with symptoms suggesting COVID-19. Each patient was tested by the general practitioner, first with a nasopharyngeal swab for the point of care test (Roche SARS-CoV-2 Rapid Antigen Test) and then with a second swab for PCR testing. Using the RT-PCR result as a reference, we calculated specificity, sensitivity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value, with their 95% confidence intervals. General practitioners and medical assistants completed a survey to assess feasibility and usefulness of the point of care tests.ResultsIn 40 practices in Würzburg, Germany, 1518 patients were recruited between 12/2020 and 06/2021. The point of care test achieved a sensitivity of 78.3% and a specificity of 99.5% compared to RT-PCR. With a prevalence of 9.5%, the positive predictive value was 93.9% and the negative predictive value was 97.8%. General practitioners rated the point of care test as a helpful tool to support diagnostics in patients with signs and symptoms suggestive for infection, particularly in situations where decision on further care is needed at short notice.ConclusionThe point of care test used in this study showed a sensitivity below the manufacturer's specification (Sensitivity 96.25%) in the practice but high values for specificity and high positive predictive value and negative predictive value. Although widely accepted in the practice, measures for further patient management require a sensitive interpretation of the point of care test results.

Project description:Monitoring antibody prevalence is a valuable tool to evaluate the burden of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in a community, identify risk factors, and assess the impact of clinical and public health intervention strategies. The antibody prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 in children in the United States in early 2022 was estimated by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to be 74.2%, using seroprevalence from a variety of sources. A study by the New Jersey Department of Health in late 2022/early 2023 in unvaccinated children found a lower prevalence, 68% when using a gum swab method to detect antibodies. This study compared the accuracy of the gum swab method to detect antibodies with simultaneously obtained serological samples in additional children. This cross-sectional study recruited well children, not vaccinated for SARS-CoV-2, aged 18 months to 11 years, who were scheduled for routine bloodwork at an inner-city university-based pediatric clinic. With parental consent, an extra 5 cc of blood and a gum swab sample were collected. Results from Diabetomics CovAb SARS-CoV-2 gum swab antibody test and Rutgers New Jersey Medical School enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay serology test for spike protein antibody were compared. The seropositivity of these paired samples was compared using McNemar's test, Cohen's kappa statistic, and other diagnostic accuracy statistics. From June through August 2023, 86 children were recruited. Antibody positivity by gum swab was 70.9% and by serology was 87.2%. The Cohen's kappa statistic was 0.39 indicating minimal agreement and McNemar's test was significant (P-value of 0.0010). Compared with serology, gum swab was 78.7% sensitive (95% CI 68.7% to 87.3%) and 81.8% specific (95% CI 48.2% to 97.7%). Positive and negative predictive values were 97.5% and 29.9%, respectively, and accuracy was 79.0%. Sensitivity in non-Hispanic versus Hispanic children was 74.2% versus 82.5%, and in children 6-11 years versus 18 months to 5 years, it was 74.2% versus 81.8%. While the gum swab method of antibody detection is not as sensitive or specific as serology, sample collection can be done in settings where phlebotomy is not feasible. This method could be useful in non-clinical settings such as surveillance, for assessing epidemiological trends and associations.ImportanceRecently a study determining the prevalence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) antibodies in unvaccinated children in NJ (Katic et al. 2023. Pediatric Academic Societies Meeting; Washington, D.C. https://2023.pas-meeting.org/searchbyposterbucket.asp?bm=Public+Health+%26+Prevention&t=Public+Health+%26+Prevention&pfp=Track) was conducted using a gum swab method for antibody detection. The Diabetomics CovAB test, which qualitatively identifies antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 spike protein, is a point-of-care, low-cost test, that is easy to administer in children. While this test provides sensitive and specific results in adults [US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). 2022. Center for devices and radiological health. EUA authorized serology test performance. Available from: https://www.fda.gov/medical-devices/covid-19-emergency-use-authorizations-medical-devices/eua-authorized-serology-test-performance], data on its accuracy in children is lacking. As a follow-up to the above-mentioned study, we compared the results of the gum swab test to a serologic antibody test. We found that the gum swab test was inferior to serology but was fairly sensitive and specific with a high positive predictive value. While the test is not ideal for diagnostic purposes in children it can be a valuable tool for public health officials and pediatricians to understand the extent of past health interventions.

Project description:The urgent need to scale up testing capacity during the COVID-19 pandemic has prompted the rapid development of point-of-care diagnostic tools such as lateral flow immunoassays (LFIA) for large-scale community-based rapid testing. However, studies of how the general public perform when using LFIA tests in different environmental settings are scarce. This user experience (UX) study of 264 participants in Northern Ireland aimed to gather a better understanding of how self-administered LFIA tests were performed by the general public at home. The UX performance was assessed via analysis of a post-test questionnaire including 30 polar questions and 11 7-point Likert scale questions, which covers the multidimensional aspects of UX in terms of ease of use, effectiveness, efficiency, accuracy and satisfaction. Results show that 96.6% of participants completed the test with an overall average UX score of 95.27% [95% confidence interval (CI) 92.71-97.83%], which suggests a good degree of user experience and effectiveness. Efficiency was assessed based on the use of physical resources and human support received, together with the mental effort of self-administering the test measured via NASA Task Load Index (TLX). The results for six TLX subscales show that the participants scored the test highest for mental demand and lowest for physical demand, but the average TLX score suggests that the general public have a relatively low level of mental workload when using LFIA self-testing at home. Five printed LFIA testing results (i.e. the 'simulated' results) were used as the ground truth to assess the participant's performance in interpreting the test results. The overall agreement (accuracy) was 80.63% [95% CI 75.21-86.05%] with a Kappa score 0.67 [95% CI 0.58-0.75] indicating substantial agreement. The users scored lower in confidence when interpreting test results that were weak positive cases (due to the relatively low signal intensity in the test-line) compared to strong positive cases. The end-users also found that the kit was easier to use than they expected (p < 0.001) and 231 of 264 (87.5%) reported that the test kit would meet their requirements if they needed an antibody testing kit. The overall findings provide an insight into the opportunities for improving the design of self-administered SARS-CoV-2 antibody testing kits for the general public and to inform protocols for future UX studies of LFIA rapid test kits.

Project description:ObjectivesTo increase testing capability for SARS-CoV-2 during a rapidly evolving public health emergency, we aimed to deploy a validated laboratory-developed real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) diagnostic test for SARS-CoV-2 on an accelerated timeline and using reagent supply chains that were not constrained.MethodsA real-time RT-PCR assay that detects the structural envelope (E) gene of SARS-CoV-2 was developed and validated on the Roche cobas 6800 instrument platform with the omni Utility channel reagents, which performs automated nucleic acid extraction and purification, PCR amplification, and detection. In silico analysis was performed for both inclusivity of all SARS-CoV-2 variants and cross reactivity with other pathogenic organisms. Positive control material was used to determine the Limit of Detection (LOD) and patient samples (positive and negative) confirmed by another authorized assay were used for clinical validation. Experiments were carried out at the Christiana Care Health System's Molecular Diagnostics Laboratory (Newark, DE) between April 1 and April 4, 2020.ResultsA real-time RT-PCR assay for SARS-Cov-2 was developed and validated in just two weeks. For all oligonucleotides, 100% homology to the available SARS-CoV-2 sequences was observed. Greater than 80% homology between one or more oligonucleotides was observed for SARS-Cov (Urbani strain) and Influenza A, however risk of cross reactivity was deemed to be low. The limit of detection (LOD) of the assay was 250 copies/mL. The assay identified 100% of positive patient samples (30/30) and 100% of negative patient samples (29/29 patient negatives and 1/1 saline). Up to 92 samples can be run on a single plate and analysis takes approximately 3.5 hours.ConclusionsIn this work, we demonstrate the development and validation of a single target laboratory-developed test for SARS-CoV-2 in two weeks. Key considerations for complementary supply chains enabled development on an accelerated timeline and an increase in testing capability.

Dataset Information

Validation of a rapid SARS-CoV-2 antibody test in general practice.

Objectives

Design

Setting

Participants

Intervention

Primary and secondary outcome measures

Results

Conclusion

Trial registration number

Publications

Validation of a rapid SARS-CoV-2 antibody test in general practice.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets