Cargando…
Clinical evaluation of rapid point-of-care antigen tests for diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection
The RT-qPCR in respiratory specimens is the gold standard for diagnosing acute COVID-19 infections. However, this test takes considerable time before test results become available, thereby delaying patients from being diagnosed, treated, and isolated immediately. Rapid antigen tests could overcome t...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8140309/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34021840 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10096-021-04274-7 |
_version_ | 1783696167431831552 |
---|---|
author | Koeleman, Johannes G. M. Brand, Henk de Man, Stijn J. Ong, David S. Y. |
author_facet | Koeleman, Johannes G. M. Brand, Henk de Man, Stijn J. Ong, David S. Y. |
author_sort | Koeleman, Johannes G. M. |
collection | PubMed |
description | The RT-qPCR in respiratory specimens is the gold standard for diagnosing acute COVID-19 infections. However, this test takes considerable time before test results become available, thereby delaying patients from being diagnosed, treated, and isolated immediately. Rapid antigen tests could overcome this problem. In the first study, clinical performances of five rapid antigen tests were compared to RT-qPCR in upper respiratory specimens from 40 patients with positive and 40 with negative RTq-PCR results. In the second study, the rapid antigen test with one of the best test characteristics (Romed) was evaluated in a large prospective collection of upper respiratory specimens from 900 different COVID-19-suspected patients (300 emergency room patients, 300 nursing home patients, and 300 health care workers). Test specificities ranged from 87.5 to 100.0%, and test sensitivities from 55.0 to 80.0%. The clinical specificity of the Romed test was 99.8% (95% CI 98.9–100). Overall clinical sensitivity in the study population was 73.3% (95% CI 67.9–78.2), whereas sensitivity in the different patient groups varied from 65.3 to 86.7%. Sensitivity was 83.0 to 86.7% in patients with short duration of symptoms. In a population with a COVID-19 prevalence of 1%, the negative predictive value in all patients was 99.7%. There is a large variability in diagnostic performance between rapid antigen tests. The Romed rapid antigen test showed a good clinical performance in patients with high viral loads (RT-qPCR cycle threshold ≤30), which makes this antigen test suitable for rapid identification of COVID-19-infected health care workers and patients. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8140309 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | Springer Berlin Heidelberg |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-81403092021-05-24 Clinical evaluation of rapid point-of-care antigen tests for diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection Koeleman, Johannes G. M. Brand, Henk de Man, Stijn J. Ong, David S. Y. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis Original Article The RT-qPCR in respiratory specimens is the gold standard for diagnosing acute COVID-19 infections. However, this test takes considerable time before test results become available, thereby delaying patients from being diagnosed, treated, and isolated immediately. Rapid antigen tests could overcome this problem. In the first study, clinical performances of five rapid antigen tests were compared to RT-qPCR in upper respiratory specimens from 40 patients with positive and 40 with negative RTq-PCR results. In the second study, the rapid antigen test with one of the best test characteristics (Romed) was evaluated in a large prospective collection of upper respiratory specimens from 900 different COVID-19-suspected patients (300 emergency room patients, 300 nursing home patients, and 300 health care workers). Test specificities ranged from 87.5 to 100.0%, and test sensitivities from 55.0 to 80.0%. The clinical specificity of the Romed test was 99.8% (95% CI 98.9–100). Overall clinical sensitivity in the study population was 73.3% (95% CI 67.9–78.2), whereas sensitivity in the different patient groups varied from 65.3 to 86.7%. Sensitivity was 83.0 to 86.7% in patients with short duration of symptoms. In a population with a COVID-19 prevalence of 1%, the negative predictive value in all patients was 99.7%. There is a large variability in diagnostic performance between rapid antigen tests. The Romed rapid antigen test showed a good clinical performance in patients with high viral loads (RT-qPCR cycle threshold ≤30), which makes this antigen test suitable for rapid identification of COVID-19-infected health care workers and patients. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2021-05-22 2021 /pmc/articles/PMC8140309/ /pubmed/34021840 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10096-021-04274-7 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 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 Article Koeleman, Johannes G. M. Brand, Henk de Man, Stijn J. Ong, David S. Y. Clinical evaluation of rapid point-of-care antigen tests for diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection |
title | Clinical evaluation of rapid point-of-care antigen tests for diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection |
title_full | Clinical evaluation of rapid point-of-care antigen tests for diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection |
title_fullStr | Clinical evaluation of rapid point-of-care antigen tests for diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection |
title_full_unstemmed | Clinical evaluation of rapid point-of-care antigen tests for diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection |
title_short | Clinical evaluation of rapid point-of-care antigen tests for diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection |
title_sort | clinical evaluation of rapid point-of-care antigen tests for diagnosis of sars-cov-2 infection |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8140309/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34021840 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10096-021-04274-7 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT koelemanjohannesgm clinicalevaluationofrapidpointofcareantigentestsfordiagnosisofsarscov2infection AT brandhenk clinicalevaluationofrapidpointofcareantigentestsfordiagnosisofsarscov2infection AT demanstijnj clinicalevaluationofrapidpointofcareantigentestsfordiagnosisofsarscov2infection AT ongdavidsy clinicalevaluationofrapidpointofcareantigentestsfordiagnosisofsarscov2infection |