Cargando…

Ten rapid antigen tests for SARS-CoV-2 widely differ in their ability to detect Omicron-BA.4 and -BA.5

Since late 2021, the variant landscape of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has been dominated by the variant of concern (VoC) Omicron and its sublineages. We and others have shown that the detection of Omicron-BA.1 and -BA.2-positive respiratory specimens by rapid ant...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Krenn, Franziska, Dächert, Christopher, Badell, Irina, Lupoli, Gaia, Öztan, Gamze Naz, Feng, Tianle, Schneider, Nikolas, Huber, Melanie, Both, Hanna, Späth, Patricia M., Muenchhoff, Maximilian, Graf, Alexander, Krebs, Stefan, Blum, Helmut, Durner, Jürgen, Czibere, Ludwig, Kaderali, Lars, Keppler, Oliver T., Baldauf, Hanna-Mari, Osterman, Andreas
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10501931/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37561225
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00430-023-00775-8
_version_ 1785106212956667904
author Krenn, Franziska
Dächert, Christopher
Badell, Irina
Lupoli, Gaia
Öztan, Gamze Naz
Feng, Tianle
Schneider, Nikolas
Huber, Melanie
Both, Hanna
Späth, Patricia M.
Muenchhoff, Maximilian
Graf, Alexander
Krebs, Stefan
Blum, Helmut
Durner, Jürgen
Czibere, Ludwig
Kaderali, Lars
Keppler, Oliver T.
Baldauf, Hanna-Mari
Osterman, Andreas
author_facet Krenn, Franziska
Dächert, Christopher
Badell, Irina
Lupoli, Gaia
Öztan, Gamze Naz
Feng, Tianle
Schneider, Nikolas
Huber, Melanie
Both, Hanna
Späth, Patricia M.
Muenchhoff, Maximilian
Graf, Alexander
Krebs, Stefan
Blum, Helmut
Durner, Jürgen
Czibere, Ludwig
Kaderali, Lars
Keppler, Oliver T.
Baldauf, Hanna-Mari
Osterman, Andreas
author_sort Krenn, Franziska
collection PubMed
description Since late 2021, the variant landscape of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has been dominated by the variant of concern (VoC) Omicron and its sublineages. We and others have shown that the detection of Omicron-BA.1 and -BA.2-positive respiratory specimens by rapid antigen tests (RATs) is impaired compared to Delta VoC-containing samples. Here, in a single-center retrospective laboratory study, we evaluated the performance of ten most commonly used RATs for the detection of Omicron-BA.4 and -BA.5 infections. We used 171 respiratory swab specimens from SARS-CoV-2 RNA-positive patients, of which 71 were classified as BA.4 and 100 as BA.5. All swabs were collected between July and September 2022. 50 SARS-CoV-2 PCR-negative samples from healthy individuals, collected in October 2022, showed high specificity in 9 out of 10 RATs. When assessing analytical sensitivity using clinical specimens, the 50% limit of detection (LoD50) ranged from 7.6 × 10(4) to 3.3 × 10(6) RNA copies subjected to the RATs for BA.4 compared to 6.8 × 10(4) to 3.0 × 10(6) for BA.5. Overall, intra-assay differences for the detection of these two Omicron subvariants were not significant for both respiratory swabs and tissue culture-expanded virus isolates. In contrast, marked heterogeneity was observed among the ten RATs: to be positive in these point-of-care tests, up to 443-fold (BA.4) and up to 56-fold (BA.5) higher viral loads were required for the worst performing RAT compared to the best performing RAT. True-positive rates for Omicron-BA.4- or -BA.5-containing specimens in the highest viral load category (C(t) values < 25) ranged from 94.3 to 34.3%, dropping to 25.6 to 0% for samples with intermediate C(t) values (25–30). We conclude that the high heterogeneity in the performance of commonly used RATs remains a challenge for the general public to obtain reliable results in the evolving Omicron subvariant-driven pandemic. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00430-023-00775-8.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10501931
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Springer Berlin Heidelberg
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-105019312023-09-16 Ten rapid antigen tests for SARS-CoV-2 widely differ in their ability to detect Omicron-BA.4 and -BA.5 Krenn, Franziska Dächert, Christopher Badell, Irina Lupoli, Gaia Öztan, Gamze Naz Feng, Tianle Schneider, Nikolas Huber, Melanie Both, Hanna Späth, Patricia M. Muenchhoff, Maximilian Graf, Alexander Krebs, Stefan Blum, Helmut Durner, Jürgen Czibere, Ludwig Kaderali, Lars Keppler, Oliver T. Baldauf, Hanna-Mari Osterman, Andreas Med Microbiol Immunol Original Investigation Since late 2021, the variant landscape of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has been dominated by the variant of concern (VoC) Omicron and its sublineages. We and others have shown that the detection of Omicron-BA.1 and -BA.2-positive respiratory specimens by rapid antigen tests (RATs) is impaired compared to Delta VoC-containing samples. Here, in a single-center retrospective laboratory study, we evaluated the performance of ten most commonly used RATs for the detection of Omicron-BA.4 and -BA.5 infections. We used 171 respiratory swab specimens from SARS-CoV-2 RNA-positive patients, of which 71 were classified as BA.4 and 100 as BA.5. All swabs were collected between July and September 2022. 50 SARS-CoV-2 PCR-negative samples from healthy individuals, collected in October 2022, showed high specificity in 9 out of 10 RATs. When assessing analytical sensitivity using clinical specimens, the 50% limit of detection (LoD50) ranged from 7.6 × 10(4) to 3.3 × 10(6) RNA copies subjected to the RATs for BA.4 compared to 6.8 × 10(4) to 3.0 × 10(6) for BA.5. Overall, intra-assay differences for the detection of these two Omicron subvariants were not significant for both respiratory swabs and tissue culture-expanded virus isolates. In contrast, marked heterogeneity was observed among the ten RATs: to be positive in these point-of-care tests, up to 443-fold (BA.4) and up to 56-fold (BA.5) higher viral loads were required for the worst performing RAT compared to the best performing RAT. True-positive rates for Omicron-BA.4- or -BA.5-containing specimens in the highest viral load category (C(t) values < 25) ranged from 94.3 to 34.3%, dropping to 25.6 to 0% for samples with intermediate C(t) values (25–30). We conclude that the high heterogeneity in the performance of commonly used RATs remains a challenge for the general public to obtain reliable results in the evolving Omicron subvariant-driven pandemic. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00430-023-00775-8. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2023-08-10 2023 /pmc/articles/PMC10501931/ /pubmed/37561225 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00430-023-00775-8 Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Original Investigation
Krenn, Franziska
Dächert, Christopher
Badell, Irina
Lupoli, Gaia
Öztan, Gamze Naz
Feng, Tianle
Schneider, Nikolas
Huber, Melanie
Both, Hanna
Späth, Patricia M.
Muenchhoff, Maximilian
Graf, Alexander
Krebs, Stefan
Blum, Helmut
Durner, Jürgen
Czibere, Ludwig
Kaderali, Lars
Keppler, Oliver T.
Baldauf, Hanna-Mari
Osterman, Andreas
Ten rapid antigen tests for SARS-CoV-2 widely differ in their ability to detect Omicron-BA.4 and -BA.5
title Ten rapid antigen tests for SARS-CoV-2 widely differ in their ability to detect Omicron-BA.4 and -BA.5
title_full Ten rapid antigen tests for SARS-CoV-2 widely differ in their ability to detect Omicron-BA.4 and -BA.5
title_fullStr Ten rapid antigen tests for SARS-CoV-2 widely differ in their ability to detect Omicron-BA.4 and -BA.5
title_full_unstemmed Ten rapid antigen tests for SARS-CoV-2 widely differ in their ability to detect Omicron-BA.4 and -BA.5
title_short Ten rapid antigen tests for SARS-CoV-2 widely differ in their ability to detect Omicron-BA.4 and -BA.5
title_sort ten rapid antigen tests for sars-cov-2 widely differ in their ability to detect omicron-ba.4 and -ba.5
topic Original Investigation
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10501931/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37561225
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00430-023-00775-8
work_keys_str_mv AT krennfranziska tenrapidantigentestsforsarscov2widelydifferintheirabilitytodetectomicronba4andba5
AT dachertchristopher tenrapidantigentestsforsarscov2widelydifferintheirabilitytodetectomicronba4andba5
AT badellirina tenrapidantigentestsforsarscov2widelydifferintheirabilitytodetectomicronba4andba5
AT lupoligaia tenrapidantigentestsforsarscov2widelydifferintheirabilitytodetectomicronba4andba5
AT oztangamzenaz tenrapidantigentestsforsarscov2widelydifferintheirabilitytodetectomicronba4andba5
AT fengtianle tenrapidantigentestsforsarscov2widelydifferintheirabilitytodetectomicronba4andba5
AT schneidernikolas tenrapidantigentestsforsarscov2widelydifferintheirabilitytodetectomicronba4andba5
AT hubermelanie tenrapidantigentestsforsarscov2widelydifferintheirabilitytodetectomicronba4andba5
AT bothhanna tenrapidantigentestsforsarscov2widelydifferintheirabilitytodetectomicronba4andba5
AT spathpatriciam tenrapidantigentestsforsarscov2widelydifferintheirabilitytodetectomicronba4andba5
AT muenchhoffmaximilian tenrapidantigentestsforsarscov2widelydifferintheirabilitytodetectomicronba4andba5
AT grafalexander tenrapidantigentestsforsarscov2widelydifferintheirabilitytodetectomicronba4andba5
AT krebsstefan tenrapidantigentestsforsarscov2widelydifferintheirabilitytodetectomicronba4andba5
AT blumhelmut tenrapidantigentestsforsarscov2widelydifferintheirabilitytodetectomicronba4andba5
AT durnerjurgen tenrapidantigentestsforsarscov2widelydifferintheirabilitytodetectomicronba4andba5
AT czibereludwig tenrapidantigentestsforsarscov2widelydifferintheirabilitytodetectomicronba4andba5
AT kaderalilars tenrapidantigentestsforsarscov2widelydifferintheirabilitytodetectomicronba4andba5
AT kepplerolivert tenrapidantigentestsforsarscov2widelydifferintheirabilitytodetectomicronba4andba5
AT baldaufhannamari tenrapidantigentestsforsarscov2widelydifferintheirabilitytodetectomicronba4andba5
AT ostermanandreas tenrapidantigentestsforsarscov2widelydifferintheirabilitytodetectomicronba4andba5