Cargando…

Comparison of Antigen Tests and qPCR in Rapid Diagnostics of Infections Caused by SARS-CoV-2 Virus

Diagnostics of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) using molecular techniques from the collected respiratory swab specimens requires well-equipped laboratory and qualified personnel, also it needs several hours of waiting for results and is expensive. Antigen tests appear to be faster and cheape...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Klajmon, Adrianna, Olechowska-Jarząb, Aldona, Salamon, Dominika, Sroka-Oleksiak, Agnieszka, Brzychczy-Włoch, Monika, Gosiewski, Tomasz
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8779007/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35062221
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/v14010017
_version_ 1784637465574768640
author Klajmon, Adrianna
Olechowska-Jarząb, Aldona
Salamon, Dominika
Sroka-Oleksiak, Agnieszka
Brzychczy-Włoch, Monika
Gosiewski, Tomasz
author_facet Klajmon, Adrianna
Olechowska-Jarząb, Aldona
Salamon, Dominika
Sroka-Oleksiak, Agnieszka
Brzychczy-Włoch, Monika
Gosiewski, Tomasz
author_sort Klajmon, Adrianna
collection PubMed
description Diagnostics of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) using molecular techniques from the collected respiratory swab specimens requires well-equipped laboratory and qualified personnel, also it needs several hours of waiting for results and is expensive. Antigen tests appear to be faster and cheaper but their sensitivity and specificity are debatable. The aim of this study was to compare a selected antigen test with quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) tests results. Nasopharyngeal swabs were collected from 192 patients with COVID-19 symptoms. All samples were tested using Vitassay qPCR SARS-CoV-2 kit and the Humasis COVID-19 Ag Test (MedSun) antigen immunochromatographic test simultaneously. Ultimately, 189 samples were tested; 3 samples were excluded due to errors in taking swabs. The qPCR and antigen test results were as follows: 47 positive and 142 negative, and 45 positive and 144 negative, respectively. Calculated sensitivity of 91.5% and specificity of 98.6% for the antigen test shows differences which are not statistically significant in comparison to qPCR. Our study showed that effectiveness of the antigen tests in rapid laboratory diagnostics is high enough to be an alternative and support for nucleic acid amplification tests (NAAT) in the virus replication phase in the course of COVID-19.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8779007
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-87790072022-01-22 Comparison of Antigen Tests and qPCR in Rapid Diagnostics of Infections Caused by SARS-CoV-2 Virus Klajmon, Adrianna Olechowska-Jarząb, Aldona Salamon, Dominika Sroka-Oleksiak, Agnieszka Brzychczy-Włoch, Monika Gosiewski, Tomasz Viruses Brief Report Diagnostics of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) using molecular techniques from the collected respiratory swab specimens requires well-equipped laboratory and qualified personnel, also it needs several hours of waiting for results and is expensive. Antigen tests appear to be faster and cheaper but their sensitivity and specificity are debatable. The aim of this study was to compare a selected antigen test with quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) tests results. Nasopharyngeal swabs were collected from 192 patients with COVID-19 symptoms. All samples were tested using Vitassay qPCR SARS-CoV-2 kit and the Humasis COVID-19 Ag Test (MedSun) antigen immunochromatographic test simultaneously. Ultimately, 189 samples were tested; 3 samples were excluded due to errors in taking swabs. The qPCR and antigen test results were as follows: 47 positive and 142 negative, and 45 positive and 144 negative, respectively. Calculated sensitivity of 91.5% and specificity of 98.6% for the antigen test shows differences which are not statistically significant in comparison to qPCR. Our study showed that effectiveness of the antigen tests in rapid laboratory diagnostics is high enough to be an alternative and support for nucleic acid amplification tests (NAAT) in the virus replication phase in the course of COVID-19. MDPI 2021-12-23 /pmc/articles/PMC8779007/ /pubmed/35062221 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/v14010017 Text en © 2021 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Brief Report
Klajmon, Adrianna
Olechowska-Jarząb, Aldona
Salamon, Dominika
Sroka-Oleksiak, Agnieszka
Brzychczy-Włoch, Monika
Gosiewski, Tomasz
Comparison of Antigen Tests and qPCR in Rapid Diagnostics of Infections Caused by SARS-CoV-2 Virus
title Comparison of Antigen Tests and qPCR in Rapid Diagnostics of Infections Caused by SARS-CoV-2 Virus
title_full Comparison of Antigen Tests and qPCR in Rapid Diagnostics of Infections Caused by SARS-CoV-2 Virus
title_fullStr Comparison of Antigen Tests and qPCR in Rapid Diagnostics of Infections Caused by SARS-CoV-2 Virus
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of Antigen Tests and qPCR in Rapid Diagnostics of Infections Caused by SARS-CoV-2 Virus
title_short Comparison of Antigen Tests and qPCR in Rapid Diagnostics of Infections Caused by SARS-CoV-2 Virus
title_sort comparison of antigen tests and qpcr in rapid diagnostics of infections caused by sars-cov-2 virus
topic Brief Report
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8779007/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35062221
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/v14010017
work_keys_str_mv AT klajmonadrianna comparisonofantigentestsandqpcrinrapiddiagnosticsofinfectionscausedbysarscov2virus
AT olechowskajarzabaldona comparisonofantigentestsandqpcrinrapiddiagnosticsofinfectionscausedbysarscov2virus
AT salamondominika comparisonofantigentestsandqpcrinrapiddiagnosticsofinfectionscausedbysarscov2virus
AT srokaoleksiakagnieszka comparisonofantigentestsandqpcrinrapiddiagnosticsofinfectionscausedbysarscov2virus
AT brzychczywłochmonika comparisonofantigentestsandqpcrinrapiddiagnosticsofinfectionscausedbysarscov2virus
AT gosiewskitomasz comparisonofantigentestsandqpcrinrapiddiagnosticsofinfectionscausedbysarscov2virus