Cargando…

A novel strategy for SARS-CoV-2 mass screening with quantitative antigen testing of saliva: a diagnostic accuracy study

BACKGROUND: Quantitative RT-PCR (RT-qPCR) of nasopharyngeal swab (NPS) samples for SARS-CoV-2 detection requires medical personnel and is time consuming, and thus is poorly suited to mass screening. In June, 2020, a chemiluminescent enzyme immunoassay (CLEIA; Lumipulse G SARS-CoV-2 Ag kit, Fujirebio...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Yokota, Isao, Shane, Peter Y, Okada, Kazufumi, Unoki, Yoko, Yang, Yichi, Iwasaki, Sumio, Fujisawa, Shinichi, Nishida, Mutsumi, Teshima, Takanori
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/PMC8133768/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34031649
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S2666-5247(21)00092-6
_version_ 1783695118142799872
author Yokota, Isao
Shane, Peter Y
Okada, Kazufumi
Unoki, Yoko
Yang, Yichi
Iwasaki, Sumio
Fujisawa, Shinichi
Nishida, Mutsumi
Teshima, Takanori
author_facet Yokota, Isao
Shane, Peter Y
Okada, Kazufumi
Unoki, Yoko
Yang, Yichi
Iwasaki, Sumio
Fujisawa, Shinichi
Nishida, Mutsumi
Teshima, Takanori
author_sort Yokota, Isao
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Quantitative RT-PCR (RT-qPCR) of nasopharyngeal swab (NPS) samples for SARS-CoV-2 detection requires medical personnel and is time consuming, and thus is poorly suited to mass screening. In June, 2020, a chemiluminescent enzyme immunoassay (CLEIA; Lumipulse G SARS-CoV-2 Ag kit, Fujirebio, Tokyo, Japan) was developed that can detect SARS-CoV-2 nucleoproteins in NPS or saliva samples within 35 min. In this study, we assessed the utility of CLEIA in mass SARS-CoV-2 screening. METHODS: We did a diagnostic accuracy study to develop a mass-screening strategy for salivary detection of SARS-CoV-2 by CLEIA, enrolling hospitalised patients with clinically confirmed COVID-19, close contacts identified at community health centres, and asymptomatic international arrivals at two airports, all based in Japan. All test participants were enrolled consecutively. We assessed the diagnostic accuracy of CLEIA compared with RT-qPCR, estimated according to concordance (Kendall's coefficient of concordance, W), and sensitivity (probability of CLEIA positivity given RT-qPCR positivity) and specificity (probability of CLEIA negativity given RT-qPCR negativity) for different antigen concentration cutoffs (0·19 pg/mL, 0·67 pg/mL, and 4·00 pg/mL; with samples considered positive if the antigen concentration was equal to or more than the cutoff and negative if it was less than the cutoff). We also assessed a two-step testing strategy post hoc with CLEIA as an initial test, using separate antigen cutoff values for test negativity and positivity from the predefined cutoff values. The proportion of intermediate results requiring secondary RT-qPCR was then quantified assuming prevalence values of RT-qPCR positivity in the overall tested population of 10%, 30%, and 50%. FINDINGS: Self-collected saliva was obtained from 2056 participants between June 12 and Aug 6, 2020. Results of CLEIA and RT-qPCR were concordant in 2020 (98·2%) samples (Kendall's W=0·99). Test sensitivity was 85·4% (76 of 89 positive samples; 90% credible interval [CrI] 78·0–90·3) at the cutoff of 0·19 pg/mL; 76·4% (68 of 89; 68·2–82·8) at the cutoff of 0·67 pg/mL; and 52·8% (47 of 89; 44·1–61·3) at the cutoff of 4·0 pg/mL. Test specificity was 91·3% (1796 of 1967 negative samples; 90% CrI 90·2–92·3) at the cutoff of 0·19 pg/mL, 99·2% (1952 of 1967; 98·8–99·5) at the cutoff of 0·67 pg/mL, and 100·0% (1967 of 1967; 99·8–100·0) at the cutoff of 4·00 pg/mL. Using a two-step testing strategy with a CLEIA negativity cutoff of 0·19 pg/mL (to maximise sensitivity) and a CLEIA positivity cutoff of 4·00 pg/mL (to maximise specificity), the proportions of indeterminate results (ie, samples requiring secondary RT-qPCR) would be approximately 11% assuming a prevalence of RT-qPCR positivity of 10%, 16% assuming a prevalence of RT-qPCR positivity of 30%, and 21% assuming a prevalence of RT-qPCR positivity of 50%. INTERPRETATION: CLEIA testing of self-collected saliva is simple and provides results quickly, and is thus suitable for mass testing. To improve accuracy, we propose a two-step screening strategy with an initial CLEIA test followed by confirmatory RT-qPCR for intermediate concentrations, varying positive and negative thresholds depending on local prevalence. Implementation of this strategy has expedited sample processing at Japanese airports since July, 2020, and might apply to other large-scale mass screening initiatives. FUNDING: Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare, Japan.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8133768
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-81337682021-05-20 A novel strategy for SARS-CoV-2 mass screening with quantitative antigen testing of saliva: a diagnostic accuracy study Yokota, Isao Shane, Peter Y Okada, Kazufumi Unoki, Yoko Yang, Yichi Iwasaki, Sumio Fujisawa, Shinichi Nishida, Mutsumi Teshima, Takanori Lancet Microbe Articles BACKGROUND: Quantitative RT-PCR (RT-qPCR) of nasopharyngeal swab (NPS) samples for SARS-CoV-2 detection requires medical personnel and is time consuming, and thus is poorly suited to mass screening. In June, 2020, a chemiluminescent enzyme immunoassay (CLEIA; Lumipulse G SARS-CoV-2 Ag kit, Fujirebio, Tokyo, Japan) was developed that can detect SARS-CoV-2 nucleoproteins in NPS or saliva samples within 35 min. In this study, we assessed the utility of CLEIA in mass SARS-CoV-2 screening. METHODS: We did a diagnostic accuracy study to develop a mass-screening strategy for salivary detection of SARS-CoV-2 by CLEIA, enrolling hospitalised patients with clinically confirmed COVID-19, close contacts identified at community health centres, and asymptomatic international arrivals at two airports, all based in Japan. All test participants were enrolled consecutively. We assessed the diagnostic accuracy of CLEIA compared with RT-qPCR, estimated according to concordance (Kendall's coefficient of concordance, W), and sensitivity (probability of CLEIA positivity given RT-qPCR positivity) and specificity (probability of CLEIA negativity given RT-qPCR negativity) for different antigen concentration cutoffs (0·19 pg/mL, 0·67 pg/mL, and 4·00 pg/mL; with samples considered positive if the antigen concentration was equal to or more than the cutoff and negative if it was less than the cutoff). We also assessed a two-step testing strategy post hoc with CLEIA as an initial test, using separate antigen cutoff values for test negativity and positivity from the predefined cutoff values. The proportion of intermediate results requiring secondary RT-qPCR was then quantified assuming prevalence values of RT-qPCR positivity in the overall tested population of 10%, 30%, and 50%. FINDINGS: Self-collected saliva was obtained from 2056 participants between June 12 and Aug 6, 2020. Results of CLEIA and RT-qPCR were concordant in 2020 (98·2%) samples (Kendall's W=0·99). Test sensitivity was 85·4% (76 of 89 positive samples; 90% credible interval [CrI] 78·0–90·3) at the cutoff of 0·19 pg/mL; 76·4% (68 of 89; 68·2–82·8) at the cutoff of 0·67 pg/mL; and 52·8% (47 of 89; 44·1–61·3) at the cutoff of 4·0 pg/mL. Test specificity was 91·3% (1796 of 1967 negative samples; 90% CrI 90·2–92·3) at the cutoff of 0·19 pg/mL, 99·2% (1952 of 1967; 98·8–99·5) at the cutoff of 0·67 pg/mL, and 100·0% (1967 of 1967; 99·8–100·0) at the cutoff of 4·00 pg/mL. Using a two-step testing strategy with a CLEIA negativity cutoff of 0·19 pg/mL (to maximise sensitivity) and a CLEIA positivity cutoff of 4·00 pg/mL (to maximise specificity), the proportions of indeterminate results (ie, samples requiring secondary RT-qPCR) would be approximately 11% assuming a prevalence of RT-qPCR positivity of 10%, 16% assuming a prevalence of RT-qPCR positivity of 30%, and 21% assuming a prevalence of RT-qPCR positivity of 50%. INTERPRETATION: CLEIA testing of self-collected saliva is simple and provides results quickly, and is thus suitable for mass testing. To improve accuracy, we propose a two-step screening strategy with an initial CLEIA test followed by confirmatory RT-qPCR for intermediate concentrations, varying positive and negative thresholds depending on local prevalence. Implementation of this strategy has expedited sample processing at Japanese airports since July, 2020, and might apply to other large-scale mass screening initiatives. FUNDING: Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare, Japan. The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. 2021-08 2021-05-19 /pmc/articles/PMC8133768/ /pubmed/34031649 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S2666-5247(21)00092-6 Text en © 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 license 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 Articles
Yokota, Isao
Shane, Peter Y
Okada, Kazufumi
Unoki, Yoko
Yang, Yichi
Iwasaki, Sumio
Fujisawa, Shinichi
Nishida, Mutsumi
Teshima, Takanori
A novel strategy for SARS-CoV-2 mass screening with quantitative antigen testing of saliva: a diagnostic accuracy study
title A novel strategy for SARS-CoV-2 mass screening with quantitative antigen testing of saliva: a diagnostic accuracy study
title_full A novel strategy for SARS-CoV-2 mass screening with quantitative antigen testing of saliva: a diagnostic accuracy study
title_fullStr A novel strategy for SARS-CoV-2 mass screening with quantitative antigen testing of saliva: a diagnostic accuracy study
title_full_unstemmed A novel strategy for SARS-CoV-2 mass screening with quantitative antigen testing of saliva: a diagnostic accuracy study
title_short A novel strategy for SARS-CoV-2 mass screening with quantitative antigen testing of saliva: a diagnostic accuracy study
title_sort novel strategy for sars-cov-2 mass screening with quantitative antigen testing of saliva: a diagnostic accuracy study
topic Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8133768/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34031649
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S2666-5247(21)00092-6
work_keys_str_mv AT yokotaisao anovelstrategyforsarscov2massscreeningwithquantitativeantigentestingofsalivaadiagnosticaccuracystudy
AT shanepetery anovelstrategyforsarscov2massscreeningwithquantitativeantigentestingofsalivaadiagnosticaccuracystudy
AT okadakazufumi anovelstrategyforsarscov2massscreeningwithquantitativeantigentestingofsalivaadiagnosticaccuracystudy
AT unokiyoko anovelstrategyforsarscov2massscreeningwithquantitativeantigentestingofsalivaadiagnosticaccuracystudy
AT yangyichi anovelstrategyforsarscov2massscreeningwithquantitativeantigentestingofsalivaadiagnosticaccuracystudy
AT iwasakisumio anovelstrategyforsarscov2massscreeningwithquantitativeantigentestingofsalivaadiagnosticaccuracystudy
AT fujisawashinichi anovelstrategyforsarscov2massscreeningwithquantitativeantigentestingofsalivaadiagnosticaccuracystudy
AT nishidamutsumi anovelstrategyforsarscov2massscreeningwithquantitativeantigentestingofsalivaadiagnosticaccuracystudy
AT teshimatakanori anovelstrategyforsarscov2massscreeningwithquantitativeantigentestingofsalivaadiagnosticaccuracystudy
AT yokotaisao novelstrategyforsarscov2massscreeningwithquantitativeantigentestingofsalivaadiagnosticaccuracystudy
AT shanepetery novelstrategyforsarscov2massscreeningwithquantitativeantigentestingofsalivaadiagnosticaccuracystudy
AT okadakazufumi novelstrategyforsarscov2massscreeningwithquantitativeantigentestingofsalivaadiagnosticaccuracystudy
AT unokiyoko novelstrategyforsarscov2massscreeningwithquantitativeantigentestingofsalivaadiagnosticaccuracystudy
AT yangyichi novelstrategyforsarscov2massscreeningwithquantitativeantigentestingofsalivaadiagnosticaccuracystudy
AT iwasakisumio novelstrategyforsarscov2massscreeningwithquantitativeantigentestingofsalivaadiagnosticaccuracystudy
AT fujisawashinichi novelstrategyforsarscov2massscreeningwithquantitativeantigentestingofsalivaadiagnosticaccuracystudy
AT nishidamutsumi novelstrategyforsarscov2massscreeningwithquantitativeantigentestingofsalivaadiagnosticaccuracystudy
AT teshimatakanori novelstrategyforsarscov2massscreeningwithquantitativeantigentestingofsalivaadiagnosticaccuracystudy