Comparative evaluation of four SARS-CoV-2 antigen tests in hospitalized patients.
Antigen test
COVID-19
Ct values
Infectivity
RT-PCR
SARS-CoV-2
Journal
International journal of infectious diseases : IJID : official publication of the International Society for Infectious Diseases
ISSN: 1878-3511
Titre abrégé: Int J Infect Dis
Pays: Canada
ID NLM: 9610933
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Apr 2021
Apr 2021
Historique:
received:
18
12
2020
revised:
05
02
2021
accepted:
08
02
2021
pubmed:
21
2
2021
medline:
14
5
2021
entrez:
20
2
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Rapid identification of infected subjects is a cornerstone for controlling a pandemic like the current one with the SARS-CoV-2. Easy to handle antigen tests can provide timely results, which is of particular importance in a primary care setting. However, concerns exist regarding their sensitivity, which led us to evaluate four commercially available tests in patients hospitalized for COVID-19. We analyzed in parallel nasopharyngeal/oropharyngeal swabs from 154 consecutive patients admitted to our department with moderate to severe COVID-19, using quantitative RT-PCR (Cobas, Roche) and up to four antigen tests from different distributors. Antigen test results were linked to Ct (cycle threshold) values as markers for patients' infectivity. We found that two out of four antigen tests correctly identified subjects with high viral loads (Ct≤25), and three out of four tests detected more than 80% of subjects with a Ct≤30, which is considered the threshold for infectivity. However, one test investigated had a poor clinical performance. When investigating subjects with Ct values >30, we found that the antigen test was still positive in up to 45% of those cases. Most antigen tests had a sufficient sensitivity to identify symptomatic subjects infected with SARS-CoV-2 and with transmissible infection. On the other hand, antigen testing may not be suitable to identify loss of infectivity in COVID-19 subjects during follow-up. Newly introduced antigen tests need to be validated in a clinical or primary care setting to define their clinical usefulness.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33609774
pii: S1201-9712(21)00138-7
doi: 10.1016/j.ijid.2021.02.052
pmc: PMC7888994
pii:
doi:
Substances chimiques
Antigens, Viral
0
Types de publication
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
144-146Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.
Références
Clin Microbiol Infect. 2021 Feb;27(2):289.e1-289.e4
pubmed: 33031947
Infection. 2020 Nov 13;:
pubmed: 33185807
Microorganisms. 2020 Dec 28;9(1):
pubmed: 33379279
Clin Microbiol Infect. 2021 Mar;27(3):472.e7-472.e10
pubmed: 33189872
Infection. 2021 Feb;49(1):95-101
pubmed: 33025521
Clin Microbiol Infect. 2011 Feb;17(2):235-7
pubmed: 20384708
Sci Transl Med. 2020 Jun 3;12(546):
pubmed: 32493791
J Clin Microbiol. 2020 Jul 23;58(8):
pubmed: 32404480
J Clin Virol. 2021 Apr;137:104782
pubmed: 33711691
Annu Rev Virol. 2020 Sep 29;7(1):83-101
pubmed: 32196426