Evaluation of Four Rapid Antigen Tests for Detection of SARS-CoV-2 virus.

Reverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction COVID-19 Diagnostic Tests, Routine

Journal

Oman medical journal
ISSN: 1999-768X
Titre abrégé: Oman Med J
Pays: Oman
ID NLM: 101526350

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
Sep 2021
Historique:
received: 21 12 2020
accepted: 28 01 2021
entrez: 11 10 2021
pubmed: 12 10 2021
medline: 12 10 2021
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Considering the increasing, significant burden that coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) imposes on the healthcare system, the need for simple, rapid, and affordable diagnostic tests to support the existing costly and demanding polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assay becomes required. This prospective diagnostic test accuracy study aims to evaluate the performance of four different COVID-19 rapid antigen tests compared to real-time reverse transcription PCR (rRT-PCR) between June and July 2020 to determine the feasibility of integrating these tests into the diagnostic algorithm in clinical settings. Swabs were collected from 306 patients and analyzed using rRT-PCR and antigen tests from four different providers. The antigen tests' sensitivities were 65.8%, 69.8%, 64.0%, and 64.3% for the STANDARD™ Q COVID-19 Ag test, PCL COVID-19 Ag Rapid fluorescent immunoassay (FIA) test, BIOCREDIT COVID-19 Ag test, and Sofia SARS-CoV-2 antigen FIA test, respectively. Specificity was 94.1% for PCL COVID-19 Ag Rapid test and 100% for the other three assays. All assays showed a significant negative correlation between the reference rRT-PCR Ct values and Ag test results. Besides, sensitivities of the STANDARD™ Q COVID-19 Ag test, PCL COVID-19 Ag Rapid FIA test, and BIOCREDIT COVID-19 Ag test improved to ≥ 85% after exclusion of samples with PCR Ct values > 30. The high specificity of the rapid antigen tests and other parameters like simplicity, rapidity, and affordability suggest that antigen tests are likely to be helpful if integrated and interpreted appropriately in stepwise diagnostic algorithms. Given the low sensitivity of 64.0-69.8% of the antigen tests, we recommend that clinically relevant negative results undergo further testing Ag to confirm or exclude a COVID-19 diagnosis.

Identifiants

pubmed: 34631156
doi: 10.5001/omj.2021.106
pii: OMJ-36-05-2000234
pmc: PMC8491111
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Pagination

e297

Informations de copyright

The OMJ is Published Bimonthly and Copyrighted 2021 by the OMSB.

Références

Viruses. 2020 May 26;12(6):
pubmed: 32466458
Clin Infect Dis. 2020 Dec 17;71(10):2663-2666
pubmed: 32442256
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020 Aug 26;8:CD013705
pubmed: 32845525
Clin Infect Dis. 2021 Jan 22;:
pubmed: 33480973
Ann Intern Med. 2020 Jun 2;172(11):726-734
pubmed: 32282894
BMJ. 2020 Apr 21;369:m1443
pubmed: 32317267
Cureus. 2020 Mar 26;12(3):e7423
pubmed: 32337143

Auteurs

Sulaiman Al-Alawi (S)

Medical Fitness Examination Center, Muscat, Oman.

Hala Al-Hinai (H)

Microbiology Department, Khoula Hospital, Muscat, Oman.

Nawal Al-Kindi (N)

Microbiology Department, Khoula Hospital, Muscat, Oman.

Mohammed Al-Rashidi (M)

Medical Fitness Examination Center, Muscat, Oman.

Hanan Al-Kindi (H)

Central Public Health Laboratories, Muscat, Oman.

Intisar Al-Shukri (I)

Central Public Health Laboratories, Muscat, Oman.

Azza Al-Rashdi (A)

Central Public Health Laboratories, Muscat, Oman.

Sachin Jose (S)

Research and Studies Department, Oman Medical Specialty Board, Muscat, Oman.

Amina Al-Jardani (A)

Central Public Health Laboratories, Muscat, Oman.

Classifications MeSH