Cargando…

Evaluation of a novel, rapid antigen detection test for the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2

BACKGROUND: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) causing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is currently finally determined in laboratory settings by real-time reverse-transcription polymerase-chain-reaction (rt-PCR). However, simple testing with immediately available result...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Thell, Rainer, Kallab, Verena, Weinhappel, Wolfgang, Mueckstein, Wolfgang, Heschl, Lukas, Heschl, Martina, Korsatko, Stefan, Toedling, Franz, Blaschke, Amelie, Herzog, Theresa, Klicpera, Anna, Koeller, Clara, Haugk, Moritz, Kreil, Anna, Spiel, Alexander, Kreuzer, Philipp, Krause, Robert, Sebesta, Christian, Winkler, Stefan, Laky, Brenda, Szell, Marton
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8629250/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34843505
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0259527
_version_ 1784607165378461696
author Thell, Rainer
Kallab, Verena
Weinhappel, Wolfgang
Mueckstein, Wolfgang
Heschl, Lukas
Heschl, Martina
Korsatko, Stefan
Toedling, Franz
Blaschke, Amelie
Herzog, Theresa
Klicpera, Anna
Koeller, Clara
Haugk, Moritz
Kreil, Anna
Spiel, Alexander
Kreuzer, Philipp
Krause, Robert
Sebesta, Christian
Winkler, Stefan
Laky, Brenda
Szell, Marton
author_facet Thell, Rainer
Kallab, Verena
Weinhappel, Wolfgang
Mueckstein, Wolfgang
Heschl, Lukas
Heschl, Martina
Korsatko, Stefan
Toedling, Franz
Blaschke, Amelie
Herzog, Theresa
Klicpera, Anna
Koeller, Clara
Haugk, Moritz
Kreil, Anna
Spiel, Alexander
Kreuzer, Philipp
Krause, Robert
Sebesta, Christian
Winkler, Stefan
Laky, Brenda
Szell, Marton
author_sort Thell, Rainer
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) causing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is currently finally determined in laboratory settings by real-time reverse-transcription polymerase-chain-reaction (rt-PCR). However, simple testing with immediately available results are crucial to gain control over COVID-19. The aim was to evaluate such a point-of-care antigen rapid test (AG-rt) device in its performance compared to laboratory-based rt-PCR testing in COVID-19 suspected, symptomatic patients. METHODS: For this prospective study, two specimens each of 541 symptomatic female (54.7%) and male (45.3%) patients aged between 18 and 95 years tested at five emergency departments (ED, n = 296) and four primary healthcare centres (PHC, n = 245), were compared, using AG-rt (positive/negative/invalid) and rt-PCR (positive/negative and cycle threshold, Ct) to diagnose SARS-CoV-2. Diagnostic accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive values (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and likelihood ratios (LR+/-) of the AG-rt were assessed. RESULTS: Differences between ED and PHC were detected regarding gender, age, symptoms, disease prevalence, and diagnostic performance. Overall, 174 (32.2%) were tested positive on AG-rt and 213 (39.4%) on rt-PCR. AG correctly classified 91.7% of all rt-PCR positive cases with a sensitivity of 80.3%, specificity of 99.1%, PPV of 98.3, NPV of 88.6%, LR(+) of 87.8, and LR(-) of 0.20. The highest sensitivities and specificities of AG-rt were detected in PHC (sensitivity: 84.4%, specificity: 100.0%), when using Ct of 30 as cut-off (sensitivity: 92.5%, specificity: 97.8%), and when symptom onset was within the first three days (sensitivity: 82.9%, specificity: 99.6%). CONCLUSIONS: The highest sensitivity was detected with a high viral load. Our findings suggest that AG-rt are comparable to rt-PCR to diagnose SARS-CoV-2 in COVID-19 suspected symptomatic patients presenting both at emergency departments and primary health care centres.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8629250
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-86292502021-11-30 Evaluation of a novel, rapid antigen detection test for the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 Thell, Rainer Kallab, Verena Weinhappel, Wolfgang Mueckstein, Wolfgang Heschl, Lukas Heschl, Martina Korsatko, Stefan Toedling, Franz Blaschke, Amelie Herzog, Theresa Klicpera, Anna Koeller, Clara Haugk, Moritz Kreil, Anna Spiel, Alexander Kreuzer, Philipp Krause, Robert Sebesta, Christian Winkler, Stefan Laky, Brenda Szell, Marton PLoS One Research Article BACKGROUND: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) causing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is currently finally determined in laboratory settings by real-time reverse-transcription polymerase-chain-reaction (rt-PCR). However, simple testing with immediately available results are crucial to gain control over COVID-19. The aim was to evaluate such a point-of-care antigen rapid test (AG-rt) device in its performance compared to laboratory-based rt-PCR testing in COVID-19 suspected, symptomatic patients. METHODS: For this prospective study, two specimens each of 541 symptomatic female (54.7%) and male (45.3%) patients aged between 18 and 95 years tested at five emergency departments (ED, n = 296) and four primary healthcare centres (PHC, n = 245), were compared, using AG-rt (positive/negative/invalid) and rt-PCR (positive/negative and cycle threshold, Ct) to diagnose SARS-CoV-2. Diagnostic accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive values (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and likelihood ratios (LR+/-) of the AG-rt were assessed. RESULTS: Differences between ED and PHC were detected regarding gender, age, symptoms, disease prevalence, and diagnostic performance. Overall, 174 (32.2%) were tested positive on AG-rt and 213 (39.4%) on rt-PCR. AG correctly classified 91.7% of all rt-PCR positive cases with a sensitivity of 80.3%, specificity of 99.1%, PPV of 98.3, NPV of 88.6%, LR(+) of 87.8, and LR(-) of 0.20. The highest sensitivities and specificities of AG-rt were detected in PHC (sensitivity: 84.4%, specificity: 100.0%), when using Ct of 30 as cut-off (sensitivity: 92.5%, specificity: 97.8%), and when symptom onset was within the first three days (sensitivity: 82.9%, specificity: 99.6%). CONCLUSIONS: The highest sensitivity was detected with a high viral load. Our findings suggest that AG-rt are comparable to rt-PCR to diagnose SARS-CoV-2 in COVID-19 suspected symptomatic patients presenting both at emergency departments and primary health care centres. Public Library of Science 2021-11-29 /pmc/articles/PMC8629250/ /pubmed/34843505 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0259527 Text en © 2021 Thell et al https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Thell, Rainer
Kallab, Verena
Weinhappel, Wolfgang
Mueckstein, Wolfgang
Heschl, Lukas
Heschl, Martina
Korsatko, Stefan
Toedling, Franz
Blaschke, Amelie
Herzog, Theresa
Klicpera, Anna
Koeller, Clara
Haugk, Moritz
Kreil, Anna
Spiel, Alexander
Kreuzer, Philipp
Krause, Robert
Sebesta, Christian
Winkler, Stefan
Laky, Brenda
Szell, Marton
Evaluation of a novel, rapid antigen detection test for the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2
title Evaluation of a novel, rapid antigen detection test for the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2
title_full Evaluation of a novel, rapid antigen detection test for the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2
title_fullStr Evaluation of a novel, rapid antigen detection test for the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2
title_full_unstemmed Evaluation of a novel, rapid antigen detection test for the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2
title_short Evaluation of a novel, rapid antigen detection test for the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2
title_sort evaluation of a novel, rapid antigen detection test for the diagnosis of sars-cov-2
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8629250/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34843505
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0259527
work_keys_str_mv AT thellrainer evaluationofanovelrapidantigendetectiontestforthediagnosisofsarscov2
AT kallabverena evaluationofanovelrapidantigendetectiontestforthediagnosisofsarscov2
AT weinhappelwolfgang evaluationofanovelrapidantigendetectiontestforthediagnosisofsarscov2
AT muecksteinwolfgang evaluationofanovelrapidantigendetectiontestforthediagnosisofsarscov2
AT heschllukas evaluationofanovelrapidantigendetectiontestforthediagnosisofsarscov2
AT heschlmartina evaluationofanovelrapidantigendetectiontestforthediagnosisofsarscov2
AT korsatkostefan evaluationofanovelrapidantigendetectiontestforthediagnosisofsarscov2
AT toedlingfranz evaluationofanovelrapidantigendetectiontestforthediagnosisofsarscov2
AT blaschkeamelie evaluationofanovelrapidantigendetectiontestforthediagnosisofsarscov2
AT herzogtheresa evaluationofanovelrapidantigendetectiontestforthediagnosisofsarscov2
AT klicperaanna evaluationofanovelrapidantigendetectiontestforthediagnosisofsarscov2
AT koellerclara evaluationofanovelrapidantigendetectiontestforthediagnosisofsarscov2
AT haugkmoritz evaluationofanovelrapidantigendetectiontestforthediagnosisofsarscov2
AT kreilanna evaluationofanovelrapidantigendetectiontestforthediagnosisofsarscov2
AT spielalexander evaluationofanovelrapidantigendetectiontestforthediagnosisofsarscov2
AT kreuzerphilipp evaluationofanovelrapidantigendetectiontestforthediagnosisofsarscov2
AT krauserobert evaluationofanovelrapidantigendetectiontestforthediagnosisofsarscov2
AT sebestachristian evaluationofanovelrapidantigendetectiontestforthediagnosisofsarscov2
AT winklerstefan evaluationofanovelrapidantigendetectiontestforthediagnosisofsarscov2
AT lakybrenda evaluationofanovelrapidantigendetectiontestforthediagnosisofsarscov2
AT szellmarton evaluationofanovelrapidantigendetectiontestforthediagnosisofsarscov2