Cargando…
Limits and Opportunities of SARS-CoV-2 Antigen Rapid Tests: An Experienced-Based Perspective
Background: Due to the steadily rising case numbers of SARS-CoV-2 infections worldwide, there is an increasing need for reliable rapid diagnostic devices in addition to existing gold standard PCR methods. Actually, public attention is focused on antigen assays including lateral flow tests (LFTs) as...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7824818/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33466537 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/pathogens10010038 |
_version_ | 1783640170126376960 |
---|---|
author | Schildgen, Verena Demuth, Sabrina Lüsebrink, Jessica Schildgen, Oliver |
author_facet | Schildgen, Verena Demuth, Sabrina Lüsebrink, Jessica Schildgen, Oliver |
author_sort | Schildgen, Verena |
collection | PubMed |
description | Background: Due to the steadily rising case numbers of SARS-CoV-2 infections worldwide, there is an increasing need for reliable rapid diagnostic devices in addition to existing gold standard PCR methods. Actually, public attention is focused on antigen assays including lateral flow tests (LFTs) as a diagnostic alternative. Therefore, different LFTs were analyzed regarding their performance in a clinical setting. Material and Methods: A pilot sample panel of 13 bronchoalveolar fluids (BALFs) and 60 throat washing (TW) samples with confirmed PCR results, as well as eight throat washes invalid by PCR, were tested with the BIOCREDIT test (RapiGEN), the Panbio(TM) assay (Abbott), and the SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen test (Roche). Conclusion: The analyzed antigen test showed an interassay correlation of 27.4%, with overall specificities ranging from 19.4% to 87.1%, while sensitivities of the respective tests ranged between 33.3% and 88.1%. Because these assays did not entirely meet all high expectations, their benefit has to be carefully evaluated for the respective test strategy and setting. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7824818 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | MDPI |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-78248182021-01-24 Limits and Opportunities of SARS-CoV-2 Antigen Rapid Tests: An Experienced-Based Perspective Schildgen, Verena Demuth, Sabrina Lüsebrink, Jessica Schildgen, Oliver Pathogens Communication Background: Due to the steadily rising case numbers of SARS-CoV-2 infections worldwide, there is an increasing need for reliable rapid diagnostic devices in addition to existing gold standard PCR methods. Actually, public attention is focused on antigen assays including lateral flow tests (LFTs) as a diagnostic alternative. Therefore, different LFTs were analyzed regarding their performance in a clinical setting. Material and Methods: A pilot sample panel of 13 bronchoalveolar fluids (BALFs) and 60 throat washing (TW) samples with confirmed PCR results, as well as eight throat washes invalid by PCR, were tested with the BIOCREDIT test (RapiGEN), the Panbio(TM) assay (Abbott), and the SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen test (Roche). Conclusion: The analyzed antigen test showed an interassay correlation of 27.4%, with overall specificities ranging from 19.4% to 87.1%, while sensitivities of the respective tests ranged between 33.3% and 88.1%. Because these assays did not entirely meet all high expectations, their benefit has to be carefully evaluated for the respective test strategy and setting. MDPI 2021-01-05 /pmc/articles/PMC7824818/ /pubmed/33466537 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/pathogens10010038 Text en © 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Communication Schildgen, Verena Demuth, Sabrina Lüsebrink, Jessica Schildgen, Oliver Limits and Opportunities of SARS-CoV-2 Antigen Rapid Tests: An Experienced-Based Perspective |
title | Limits and Opportunities of SARS-CoV-2 Antigen Rapid Tests: An Experienced-Based Perspective |
title_full | Limits and Opportunities of SARS-CoV-2 Antigen Rapid Tests: An Experienced-Based Perspective |
title_fullStr | Limits and Opportunities of SARS-CoV-2 Antigen Rapid Tests: An Experienced-Based Perspective |
title_full_unstemmed | Limits and Opportunities of SARS-CoV-2 Antigen Rapid Tests: An Experienced-Based Perspective |
title_short | Limits and Opportunities of SARS-CoV-2 Antigen Rapid Tests: An Experienced-Based Perspective |
title_sort | limits and opportunities of sars-cov-2 antigen rapid tests: an experienced-based perspective |
topic | Communication |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7824818/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33466537 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/pathogens10010038 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT schildgenverena limitsandopportunitiesofsarscov2antigenrapidtestsanexperiencedbasedperspective AT demuthsabrina limitsandopportunitiesofsarscov2antigenrapidtestsanexperiencedbasedperspective AT lusebrinkjessica limitsandopportunitiesofsarscov2antigenrapidtestsanexperiencedbasedperspective AT schildgenoliver limitsandopportunitiesofsarscov2antigenrapidtestsanexperiencedbasedperspective |