Multi-site clinical validation of Isothermal Amplification based SARS-COV-2 detection assays using different sampling strategies.
Journal
medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences
Titre abrégé: medRxiv
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101767986
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
06 Jul 2021
06 Jul 2021
Historique:
entrez:
16
7
2021
pubmed:
17
7
2021
medline:
17
7
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Isothermal amplification-based tests were developed as rapid, low-cost, and simple alternatives to real-time reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) tests for SARS-COV-2 detection. Clinical performance of two isothermal amplification-based tests (Atila Biosystems iAMP COVID-19 detection test and OptiGene COVID-19 Direct Plus RT-LAMP test) was compared to clinical RT-PCR assays using different sampling strategies. A total of 1378 participants were tested across four study sites. Compared to standard of care RT-PCR testing, the overall sensitivity and specificity of the Atila iAMP test for detection of SARS-CoV-2 were 76.2% and 94.9%, respectively, and increased to 88.8% and 89.5%, respectively, after exclusion of an outlier study site. Sensitivity varied based on the anatomic collected site. Sensitivity for nasopharyngeal was 65.4% (range across study sites:52.8%-79.8%), mid-turbinate 88.2%, saliva 55.1% (range across study sites:42.9%-77.8%) and anterior nares 66.7% (range across study sites:63.6%-76.5%). The specificity for these anatomic collection sites ranged from 96.7% to 100%. Sensitivity improved in symptomatic patients (overall 82.7%) and those with a higher viral load (overall 92.4% for ct≤25). Sensitivity and specificity of the OptiGene Direct Plus RT-LAMP test, conducted at a single study-site, were 25.5% and 100%, respectively. The Atila iAMP COVID test with mid-turbinate sampling is a rapid, low-cost assay for detecting SARS-COV-2, especially in symptomatic patients and those with a high viral load, and could be used to reduce the risk of SARS-COV-2 transmission in clinical settings. Variation of performance between study sites highlights the need for site-specific clinical validation of these assays before clinical adoption.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Isothermal amplification-based tests were developed as rapid, low-cost, and simple alternatives to real-time reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) tests for SARS-COV-2 detection.
METHODS
METHODS
Clinical performance of two isothermal amplification-based tests (Atila Biosystems iAMP COVID-19 detection test and OptiGene COVID-19 Direct Plus RT-LAMP test) was compared to clinical RT-PCR assays using different sampling strategies. A total of 1378 participants were tested across four study sites.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Compared to standard of care RT-PCR testing, the overall sensitivity and specificity of the Atila iAMP test for detection of SARS-CoV-2 were 76.2% and 94.9%, respectively, and increased to 88.8% and 89.5%, respectively, after exclusion of an outlier study site. Sensitivity varied based on the anatomic collected site. Sensitivity for nasopharyngeal was 65.4% (range across study sites:52.8%-79.8%), mid-turbinate 88.2%, saliva 55.1% (range across study sites:42.9%-77.8%) and anterior nares 66.7% (range across study sites:63.6%-76.5%). The specificity for these anatomic collection sites ranged from 96.7% to 100%. Sensitivity improved in symptomatic patients (overall 82.7%) and those with a higher viral load (overall 92.4% for ct≤25). Sensitivity and specificity of the OptiGene Direct Plus RT-LAMP test, conducted at a single study-site, were 25.5% and 100%, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
The Atila iAMP COVID test with mid-turbinate sampling is a rapid, low-cost assay for detecting SARS-COV-2, especially in symptomatic patients and those with a high viral load, and could be used to reduce the risk of SARS-COV-2 transmission in clinical settings. Variation of performance between study sites highlights the need for site-specific clinical validation of these assays before clinical adoption.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34268516
doi: 10.1101/2021.07.01.21259879
pmc: PMC8282105
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Preprint
Langues
eng
Commentaires et corrections
Type : UpdateIn
Références
JMIR Cancer. 2020 Oct 29;6(2):e21697
pubmed: 33027039
BMJ. 2020 Nov 6;371:m4323
pubmed: 33158908
J Infect. 2021 Feb;82(2):282-327
pubmed: 33573778
Nature. 2020 May;581(7809):465-469
pubmed: 32235945
J Med Virol. 2021 Sep;93(9):5538-5543
pubmed: 34002401
BMJ. 2021 Feb 3;372:n208
pubmed: 33536228
J Clin Med. 2021 Jan 13;10(2):
pubmed: 33450853
Clin Infect Dis. 2021 Dec 6;73(11):e3884-e3899
pubmed: 33270107
Ann Intern Med. 2021 May;174(5):JC56
pubmed: 33939481
J Clin Microbiol. 2020 Jul 23;58(8):
pubmed: 32381642
BMJ. 2020 Oct 23;371:m3862
pubmed: 33097561
J Clin Virol. 2020 Aug;129:104427
pubmed: 32535398