Dataset Information

Evaluation of six commercial SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen tests in nasopharyngeal swabs: Better knowledge for better patient management?

ABSTRACT: Robust antigen point-of-care SARS-CoV-2 tests have been proposed as an efficient tool to address the COVID-19 pandemic. This requirement was raised after acknowledging the constraints that are brought by molecular biology. However, worldwide markets have been flooded with cheap and potentially underperforming lateral flow assays. Herein we retrospectively compared the overall performance of five qualitative rapid antigen SARS-CoV-2 assays and one quantitative automated test on 239 clinical swabs. While the overall sensitivity and specificity are relatively similar for all tests, concordance with molecular based methods varies, ranging from 75,7% to 83,3% among evaluated tests. Sensitivity is greatly improved when considering patients with higher viral excretion (Ct≤33), proving that antigen tests accurately distinguish infectious patients from viral shedding. These results should be taken into consideration by clinicians involved in patient triage and management, as well as by national authorities in public health strategies and for mass campaign approaches.

SUBMITTER: Andreani J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8376530 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Evaluation of six commercial SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen tests in nasopharyngeal swabs: Better knowledge for better patient management?

Andreani Julien J Lupo Julien J Germi Raphaële R Laugier Christel C Roccon Marie M Larrat Sylvie S Morand Patrice P Nemoz Benjamin B

Journal of clinical virology : the official publication of the Pan American Society for Clinical Virology 20210820

Robust antigen point-of-care SARS-CoV-2 tests have been proposed as an efficient tool to address the COVID-19 pandemic. This requirement was raised after acknowledging the constraints that are brought by molecular biology. However, worldwide markets have been flooded with cheap and potentially underperforming lateral flow assays. Herein we retrospectively compared the overall performance of five qualitative rapid antigen SARS-CoV-2 assays and one quantitative automated test on 239 clinical swabs ...[more]

PMID: 34492569

Similar Datasets

Project description:The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, which started in December 2019, has been posing significant challenges to the health care system worldwide. As the pandemic spreads with rapidly increasing number of positive cases, early diagnosis of infected patients is crucial to successfully limit the spread of the virus. Although the real-time reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR) is the recommended laboratory method to diagnose COVID-19 infection, many factors such as availability of laboratory equipment, reagents and trained personnel affect the use of time-consuming molecular techniques. To facilitate on-the-spot diagnosis of COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen tests were developed by several different manufacturers. The evaluation of such rapid tests is particularly important due to the recent unanimous agreement by the European Commission Member States on a recommendation setting out a framework for the use of antigen rapid tests that contains a list of the mutually recognized assays and the basis of independent validation protocols. To evaluate the on-field performance of ten commercially available SARS-CoV-2 antigen rapid tests (CLINITEST Rapid COVID-19 Antigen Test, GenBody COVID-19 Antigen Test, GENEDIA W COVID-19 Ag Test, Healgen Coronavirus Antigen Rapid Test, Humasis COVID-19 Ag Test, VivaDiag SARS-CoV-2 Ag Rapid Test, Helix i-SARS-CoV-2 Ag Rapid Test, Roche SARS-CoV-2 Rapid Antigen Test, Abbot COVID-19 Ag Rapid Test and Vazyme SARS-CoV-2 Antigen Detection Kit) and compare with RT-qPCR as a reference method, the Hungarian National Public Health Center provided 1,597 antigen rapid tests to the National Ambulance Service, COVID-testing trucks and two hospitals treating COVID-19 patients. Sensitivity, specificity and accuracy were determined by performing the rapid test directly from nasopharyngeal swab samples of symptomatic individuals. For strongly positive samples (Ct < 25) sensitivities ranged between 66.7% and 100%, while for positive samples (Ct < 30) they gave a maximum sensitivity of 87.5%. The specificity of the tests was ranging between 79% to 100%. The results presented here are of high importance to the European Commission and also help governmental decision-making regarding the application of the proper rapid tests for screening different at-risk populations. Nonetheless, SARS-Cov-2 rapid tests play an important role in early and on-the-spot diagnosis of potentially infected individuals.

Dataset Information

Evaluation of six commercial SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen tests in nasopharyngeal swabs: Better knowledge for better patient management?

Publications

Evaluation of six commercial SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen tests in nasopharyngeal swabs: Better knowledge for better patient management?

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets