Cargando…
Evaluation of the Roche antigen rapid test and a cell culture-based assay compared to rRT- PCR for the detection of SARS-CoV-2: A contribution to the discussion about SARS-CoV-2 diagnostic tests and contagiousness
BACKGROUND: The most sensitive method to detect SARS-CoV-2 relies on rRT-PCR; however, viral RNA can be detected weeks/months after clinical resolution. Since rRT-PCR cannot discern between non- and infectious virus, it is unclear whether the presence of viral RNA after recovery reflects infectious...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8106823/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35262007 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcvp.2021.100020 |
_version_ | 1783689838504968192 |
---|---|
author | Steinlin-Schopfer, Jacqueline Barbani, Maria Teresa Kamgang, Richard Zwahlen, Martina Suter-Riniker, Franziska Dijkman, Ronald |
author_facet | Steinlin-Schopfer, Jacqueline Barbani, Maria Teresa Kamgang, Richard Zwahlen, Martina Suter-Riniker, Franziska Dijkman, Ronald |
author_sort | Steinlin-Schopfer, Jacqueline |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: The most sensitive method to detect SARS-CoV-2 relies on rRT-PCR; however, viral RNA can be detected weeks/months after clinical resolution. Since rRT-PCR cannot discern between non- and infectious virus, it is unclear whether the presence of viral RNA after recovery reflects infectious SARS-CoV-2. However, recent studies suggest a positive correlation between antigen rapid tests (Ag-RDT) and virus isolation that is more suited to assess contagiousness. OBJECTIVES: To assess the utility of SARS-CoV-2 diagnostic tests in different settings we evaluated the performance of Ag-RDT-based and a cell culture-based SARS-CoV-2 assay in comparison to rRT-PCR. STUDY DESIGN: A total of 61 Nasopharyngeal-Swabs tested positive by cobas(Ⓡ) SARS-CoV-2 rRT-PCR were in parallel evaluated with the Roche Ag-RDT and a cell culture-based assay to detect SARS-CoV-2. RESULTS: SARS-CoV-2 was successfully isolated in 51/61 samples corresponding to 83.6%, which was 97.3% or 96.2% when considering samples with E-gene Ct-value <25 and <28, respectively. In comparison, the Ag-RDT showed an overall sensitivity of 85.2%, that increased to 100% and 96.2% using an E-gene Ct-value cut-off of <25 and <28, respectively. There was an overall good agreement between the commercial Ag-RDT and our in-house cell culture-based SARS-CoV-2 detection assay. However, SARS-CoV-2 could be isolated from two samples that tested negative by Ag-RDT. CONCLUSIONS: Our results support the use of the Roche Ag-RDT to detect SARS-CoV-2 exposure in large scale populations. However, it is recommended to use rRT-PCR, potentially in conjunction with cell culture-based SARS-CoV-2 assay, to support clinicians in making decisions regarding fragile patient groups. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8106823 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-81068232021-05-10 Evaluation of the Roche antigen rapid test and a cell culture-based assay compared to rRT- PCR for the detection of SARS-CoV-2: A contribution to the discussion about SARS-CoV-2 diagnostic tests and contagiousness Steinlin-Schopfer, Jacqueline Barbani, Maria Teresa Kamgang, Richard Zwahlen, Martina Suter-Riniker, Franziska Dijkman, Ronald Journal of Clinical Virology Plus Article BACKGROUND: The most sensitive method to detect SARS-CoV-2 relies on rRT-PCR; however, viral RNA can be detected weeks/months after clinical resolution. Since rRT-PCR cannot discern between non- and infectious virus, it is unclear whether the presence of viral RNA after recovery reflects infectious SARS-CoV-2. However, recent studies suggest a positive correlation between antigen rapid tests (Ag-RDT) and virus isolation that is more suited to assess contagiousness. OBJECTIVES: To assess the utility of SARS-CoV-2 diagnostic tests in different settings we evaluated the performance of Ag-RDT-based and a cell culture-based SARS-CoV-2 assay in comparison to rRT-PCR. STUDY DESIGN: A total of 61 Nasopharyngeal-Swabs tested positive by cobas(Ⓡ) SARS-CoV-2 rRT-PCR were in parallel evaluated with the Roche Ag-RDT and a cell culture-based assay to detect SARS-CoV-2. RESULTS: SARS-CoV-2 was successfully isolated in 51/61 samples corresponding to 83.6%, which was 97.3% or 96.2% when considering samples with E-gene Ct-value <25 and <28, respectively. In comparison, the Ag-RDT showed an overall sensitivity of 85.2%, that increased to 100% and 96.2% using an E-gene Ct-value cut-off of <25 and <28, respectively. There was an overall good agreement between the commercial Ag-RDT and our in-house cell culture-based SARS-CoV-2 detection assay. However, SARS-CoV-2 could be isolated from two samples that tested negative by Ag-RDT. CONCLUSIONS: Our results support the use of the Roche Ag-RDT to detect SARS-CoV-2 exposure in large scale populations. However, it is recommended to use rRT-PCR, potentially in conjunction with cell culture-based SARS-CoV-2 assay, to support clinicians in making decisions regarding fragile patient groups. The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. 2021-06 2021-05-09 /pmc/articles/PMC8106823/ /pubmed/35262007 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcvp.2021.100020 Text en © 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. Since January 2020 Elsevier has created a COVID-19 resource centre with free information in English and Mandarin on the novel coronavirus COVID-19. The COVID-19 resource centre is hosted on Elsevier Connect, the company's public news and information website. Elsevier hereby grants permission to make all its COVID-19-related research that is available on the COVID-19 resource centre - including this research content - immediately available in PubMed Central and other publicly funded repositories, such as the WHO COVID database with rights for unrestricted research re-use and analyses in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for free by Elsevier for as long as the COVID-19 resource centre remains active. |
spellingShingle | Article Steinlin-Schopfer, Jacqueline Barbani, Maria Teresa Kamgang, Richard Zwahlen, Martina Suter-Riniker, Franziska Dijkman, Ronald Evaluation of the Roche antigen rapid test and a cell culture-based assay compared to rRT- PCR for the detection of SARS-CoV-2: A contribution to the discussion about SARS-CoV-2 diagnostic tests and contagiousness |
title | Evaluation of the Roche antigen rapid test and a cell culture-based assay compared to rRT- PCR for the detection of SARS-CoV-2: A contribution to the discussion about SARS-CoV-2 diagnostic tests and contagiousness |
title_full | Evaluation of the Roche antigen rapid test and a cell culture-based assay compared to rRT- PCR for the detection of SARS-CoV-2: A contribution to the discussion about SARS-CoV-2 diagnostic tests and contagiousness |
title_fullStr | Evaluation of the Roche antigen rapid test and a cell culture-based assay compared to rRT- PCR for the detection of SARS-CoV-2: A contribution to the discussion about SARS-CoV-2 diagnostic tests and contagiousness |
title_full_unstemmed | Evaluation of the Roche antigen rapid test and a cell culture-based assay compared to rRT- PCR for the detection of SARS-CoV-2: A contribution to the discussion about SARS-CoV-2 diagnostic tests and contagiousness |
title_short | Evaluation of the Roche antigen rapid test and a cell culture-based assay compared to rRT- PCR for the detection of SARS-CoV-2: A contribution to the discussion about SARS-CoV-2 diagnostic tests and contagiousness |
title_sort | evaluation of the roche antigen rapid test and a cell culture-based assay compared to rrt- pcr for the detection of sars-cov-2: a contribution to the discussion about sars-cov-2 diagnostic tests and contagiousness |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8106823/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35262007 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcvp.2021.100020 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT steinlinschopferjacqueline evaluationoftherocheantigenrapidtestandacellculturebasedassaycomparedtorrtpcrforthedetectionofsarscov2acontributiontothediscussionaboutsarscov2diagnostictestsandcontagiousness AT barbanimariateresa evaluationoftherocheantigenrapidtestandacellculturebasedassaycomparedtorrtpcrforthedetectionofsarscov2acontributiontothediscussionaboutsarscov2diagnostictestsandcontagiousness AT kamgangrichard evaluationoftherocheantigenrapidtestandacellculturebasedassaycomparedtorrtpcrforthedetectionofsarscov2acontributiontothediscussionaboutsarscov2diagnostictestsandcontagiousness AT zwahlenmartina evaluationoftherocheantigenrapidtestandacellculturebasedassaycomparedtorrtpcrforthedetectionofsarscov2acontributiontothediscussionaboutsarscov2diagnostictestsandcontagiousness AT suterrinikerfranziska evaluationoftherocheantigenrapidtestandacellculturebasedassaycomparedtorrtpcrforthedetectionofsarscov2acontributiontothediscussionaboutsarscov2diagnostictestsandcontagiousness AT dijkmanronald evaluationoftherocheantigenrapidtestandacellculturebasedassaycomparedtorrtpcrforthedetectionofsarscov2acontributiontothediscussionaboutsarscov2diagnostictestsandcontagiousness |