Cargando…

Recalibrating SARS-CoV-2 Antigen Rapid Lateral Flow Test Relative Sensitivity from Validation Studies to Absolute Sensitivity for Indicating Individuals Shedding Transmissible Virus

Testing for SARS-CoV-2 internationally has focused on COVID-19 diagnosis among symptomatic individuals using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (PCR) tests. Recently, however, SARS-CoV-2 antigen rapid lateral flow tests (LFT) have been rolled out in several countries for testing asympto...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Petersen, Irene, Crozier, Alexander, Buchan, Iain, Mina, Michael J, Bartlett, Jonathan W
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Dove 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8527245/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34703318
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/CLEP.S311977
_version_ 1784586035049529344
author Petersen, Irene
Crozier, Alexander
Buchan, Iain
Mina, Michael J
Bartlett, Jonathan W
author_facet Petersen, Irene
Crozier, Alexander
Buchan, Iain
Mina, Michael J
Bartlett, Jonathan W
author_sort Petersen, Irene
collection PubMed
description Testing for SARS-CoV-2 internationally has focused on COVID-19 diagnosis among symptomatic individuals using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (PCR) tests. Recently, however, SARS-CoV-2 antigen rapid lateral flow tests (LFT) have been rolled out in several countries for testing asymptomatic individuals in public health programmes. Validation studies for LFT have been largely cross-sectional, reporting sensitivity, specificity and predictive values of LFT relative to PCR. However, because PCR detects genetic material left behind for a long period when the individual is no longer infectious, these statistics can under-represent the sensitivity of LFT for detecting infectious individuals, especially when sampling asymptomatic populations. LFTs (intended to detect individuals shedding SARS-CoV-2 antigens) validated against PCR (intended to diagnose infection) are not reporting against a gold standard of equivalent measurements. Instead, these validation studies have reported relative performance statistics that need recalibrating to the purpose for which LFT is being used. We present an approach to this recalibration. We derive a formula for recalibrating relative performance statistics from LFT vs PCR validation studies to give likely absolute sensitivity of LFT for detecting individuals who are shedding shedding SARS-CoV-2 antigens. We contrast widely reported apparent sensitivities of LFT with recalibrated absolute sensitivity for detecting individuals shedding SARS-CoV-2 antigens. After accounting for within-individual viral kinetics and epidemic dynamics within asymptomatic populations we show that a highly performant test for SARS-CoV-2 antigen should show LFT-to-PCR relative sensitivity of less than 50% in conventional validation studies, which after re-calibration would be an absolute sensitivity of more than 80%. Further studies are needed to ascertain the absolute sensitivity of LFT as a test of infectiousness in COVID-19 responses. These studies should include longitudinal series of LFT and PCR, ideally in cohorts sampled from both contacts of cases and the general population.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8527245
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Dove
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-85272452021-10-25 Recalibrating SARS-CoV-2 Antigen Rapid Lateral Flow Test Relative Sensitivity from Validation Studies to Absolute Sensitivity for Indicating Individuals Shedding Transmissible Virus Petersen, Irene Crozier, Alexander Buchan, Iain Mina, Michael J Bartlett, Jonathan W Clin Epidemiol Methodology Testing for SARS-CoV-2 internationally has focused on COVID-19 diagnosis among symptomatic individuals using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (PCR) tests. Recently, however, SARS-CoV-2 antigen rapid lateral flow tests (LFT) have been rolled out in several countries for testing asymptomatic individuals in public health programmes. Validation studies for LFT have been largely cross-sectional, reporting sensitivity, specificity and predictive values of LFT relative to PCR. However, because PCR detects genetic material left behind for a long period when the individual is no longer infectious, these statistics can under-represent the sensitivity of LFT for detecting infectious individuals, especially when sampling asymptomatic populations. LFTs (intended to detect individuals shedding SARS-CoV-2 antigens) validated against PCR (intended to diagnose infection) are not reporting against a gold standard of equivalent measurements. Instead, these validation studies have reported relative performance statistics that need recalibrating to the purpose for which LFT is being used. We present an approach to this recalibration. We derive a formula for recalibrating relative performance statistics from LFT vs PCR validation studies to give likely absolute sensitivity of LFT for detecting individuals who are shedding shedding SARS-CoV-2 antigens. We contrast widely reported apparent sensitivities of LFT with recalibrated absolute sensitivity for detecting individuals shedding SARS-CoV-2 antigens. After accounting for within-individual viral kinetics and epidemic dynamics within asymptomatic populations we show that a highly performant test for SARS-CoV-2 antigen should show LFT-to-PCR relative sensitivity of less than 50% in conventional validation studies, which after re-calibration would be an absolute sensitivity of more than 80%. Further studies are needed to ascertain the absolute sensitivity of LFT as a test of infectiousness in COVID-19 responses. These studies should include longitudinal series of LFT and PCR, ideally in cohorts sampled from both contacts of cases and the general population. Dove 2021-10-14 /pmc/articles/PMC8527245/ /pubmed/34703318 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/CLEP.S311977 Text en © 2021 Petersen et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution – Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) ). By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms (https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php).
spellingShingle Methodology
Petersen, Irene
Crozier, Alexander
Buchan, Iain
Mina, Michael J
Bartlett, Jonathan W
Recalibrating SARS-CoV-2 Antigen Rapid Lateral Flow Test Relative Sensitivity from Validation Studies to Absolute Sensitivity for Indicating Individuals Shedding Transmissible Virus
title Recalibrating SARS-CoV-2 Antigen Rapid Lateral Flow Test Relative Sensitivity from Validation Studies to Absolute Sensitivity for Indicating Individuals Shedding Transmissible Virus
title_full Recalibrating SARS-CoV-2 Antigen Rapid Lateral Flow Test Relative Sensitivity from Validation Studies to Absolute Sensitivity for Indicating Individuals Shedding Transmissible Virus
title_fullStr Recalibrating SARS-CoV-2 Antigen Rapid Lateral Flow Test Relative Sensitivity from Validation Studies to Absolute Sensitivity for Indicating Individuals Shedding Transmissible Virus
title_full_unstemmed Recalibrating SARS-CoV-2 Antigen Rapid Lateral Flow Test Relative Sensitivity from Validation Studies to Absolute Sensitivity for Indicating Individuals Shedding Transmissible Virus
title_short Recalibrating SARS-CoV-2 Antigen Rapid Lateral Flow Test Relative Sensitivity from Validation Studies to Absolute Sensitivity for Indicating Individuals Shedding Transmissible Virus
title_sort recalibrating sars-cov-2 antigen rapid lateral flow test relative sensitivity from validation studies to absolute sensitivity for indicating individuals shedding transmissible virus
topic Methodology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8527245/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34703318
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/CLEP.S311977
work_keys_str_mv AT petersenirene recalibratingsarscov2antigenrapidlateralflowtestrelativesensitivityfromvalidationstudiestoabsolutesensitivityforindicatingindividualssheddingtransmissiblevirus
AT crozieralexander recalibratingsarscov2antigenrapidlateralflowtestrelativesensitivityfromvalidationstudiestoabsolutesensitivityforindicatingindividualssheddingtransmissiblevirus
AT buchaniain recalibratingsarscov2antigenrapidlateralflowtestrelativesensitivityfromvalidationstudiestoabsolutesensitivityforindicatingindividualssheddingtransmissiblevirus
AT minamichaelj recalibratingsarscov2antigenrapidlateralflowtestrelativesensitivityfromvalidationstudiestoabsolutesensitivityforindicatingindividualssheddingtransmissiblevirus
AT bartlettjonathanw recalibratingsarscov2antigenrapidlateralflowtestrelativesensitivityfromvalidationstudiestoabsolutesensitivityforindicatingindividualssheddingtransmissiblevirus