Diagnostic accuracy of two commercial SARS-CoV-2 antigen-detecting rapid tests at the point of care in community-based testing centers.
Journal
PloS one
ISSN: 1932-6203
Titre abrégé: PLoS One
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101285081
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2021
2021
Historique:
received:
11
01
2021
accepted:
09
03
2021
entrez:
31
3
2021
pubmed:
1
4
2021
medline:
10
4
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Determine the diagnostic accuracy of two antigen-detecting rapid diagnostic tests (Ag-RDT) for SARS-CoV-2 at the point of care and define individuals' characteristics providing best performance. We performed a prospective, single-center, point of care validation of two Ag-RDT in comparison to RT-PCR on nasopharyngeal swabs. Between October 9th and 23rd, 2020, 1064 participants were enrolled. The PanbioTM Covid-19 Ag Rapid Test device (Abbott) was validated in 535 participants, with 106 positive Ag-RDT results out of 124 positive RT-PCR individuals, yielding a sensitivity of 85.5% (95% CI: 78.0-91.2). Specificity was 100.0% (95% CI: 99.1-100) in 411 RT-PCR negative individuals. The Standard Q Ag-RDT (SD Biosensor, Roche) was validated in 529 participants, with 170 positive Ag-RDT results out of 191 positive RT-PCR individuals, yielding a sensitivity of 89.0% (95%CI: 83.7-93.1). One false positive result was obtained in 338 RT-PCR negative individuals, yielding a specificity of 99.7% (95%CI: 98.4-100). For individuals presenting with fever 1-5 days post symptom onset, combined Ag-RDT sensitivity was above 95%. Lower sensitivity of 88.2% was seen on the same day of symptom development (day 0). We provide an independent validation of two widely available commercial Ag-RDTs, both meeting WHO criteria of ≥80% sensitivity and ≥97% specificity. Although less sensitive than RT-PCR, these assays could be beneficial due to their rapid results, ease of use, and independence from existing laboratory structures. Testing criteria focusing on patients with typical symptoms in their early symptomatic period onset could further increase diagnostic value.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33788882
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0248921
pii: PONE-D-21-00996
pmc: PMC8011749
doi:
Substances chimiques
Antigens, Viral
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e0248921Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Références
Nat Commun. 2021 Jan 11;12(1):267
pubmed: 33431879
BMJ Open. 2020 Aug 5;10(8):e039856
pubmed: 32759252
J Clin Virol. 2020 Nov;132:104654
pubmed: 33053494
J Clin Virol. 2020 Dec;133:104659
pubmed: 33160179
J Clin Microbiol. 2021 Jan 21;59(2):
pubmed: 33139420
N Engl J Med. 2020 Nov 26;383(22):e120
pubmed: 32997903
J Infect. 2020 Sep;81(3):357-371
pubmed: 32615199
Nat Med. 2020 May;26(5):672-675
pubmed: 32296168
Virol J. 2020 Nov 13;17(1):177
pubmed: 33187528
J Clin Microbiol. 2020 Jul 23;58(8):
pubmed: 32404480
EClinicalMedicine. 2021 Jan;31:100677
pubmed: 33521610
N Engl J Med. 2003 May 15;348(20):1967-76
pubmed: 12690091
Euro Surveill. 2012 Sep 27;17(39):
pubmed: 23041020
Epidemiol Mikrobiol Imunol. 2021 Summer;70(3):156-160
pubmed: 34641689
Nature. 2020 May;581(7809):465-469
pubmed: 32235945
Clin Infect Dis. 2021 Jul 1;73(1):148-150
pubmed: 32761228
Nature. 2020 Jul;583(7817):506-509
pubmed: 32681157
Clin Microbiol Infect. 2021 Mar;27(3):472.e7-472.e10
pubmed: 33189872
Indian J Med Res. 2021 Jan & Feb;153(1 & 2):126-131
pubmed: 33818469
N Engl J Med. 2020 Mar 19;382(12):1177-1179
pubmed: 32074444
J Infect. 2021 May;82(5):186-230
pubmed: 33421447
mSphere. 2020 Nov 11;5(6):
pubmed: 33177214
Ann Intern Med. 2020 May 05;172(9):577-582
pubmed: 32150748
Int J Infect Dis. 2021 Mar;104:282-286
pubmed: 33130198
Emerg Infect Dis. 2020 Oct;26(10):2494-2497
pubmed: 32603290
Sci Adv. 2021 Jan 1;7(1):
pubmed: 33219112
Open Forum Infect Dis. 2021 Feb 02;8(3):ofab059
pubmed: 33723512