Cargando…

Clinical evaluation of the Diagnostic Analyzer for Selective Hybridization (DASH): a point-of-care PCR test for rapid detection of SARS-CoV-2 infection

BACKGROUND: Rapid and accurate testing for SARS-CoV-2 is an essential tool in the medical and public health response to the COVID-19 pandemic. An ideal test for COVID-19 would combine the sensitivity of laboratory-based PCR combined with the speed and ease of use of point-of-care (POC) or home-based...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Achenbach, Chad J, Caputo, Matthew, Hawkins, Claudia, Balmert, Lauren C, Qi, Chao, Odorisio, Joseph, Dembele, Etienne, Jackson, Alema, Abbas, Hiba, Frediani, Jennifer K, Levy, Joshua M, Rebolledo, Paulina A., Kempker, Russell R., Esper, Annette M., Lam, Wilbur A., Martin, Greg S., Murphy, Robert L
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8811909/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35118476
http://dx.doi.org/10.1101/2022.01.24.22269785
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: Rapid and accurate testing for SARS-CoV-2 is an essential tool in the medical and public health response to the COVID-19 pandemic. An ideal test for COVID-19 would combine the sensitivity of laboratory-based PCR combined with the speed and ease of use of point-of-care (POC) or home-based rapid antigen testing. METHODS: To evaluate the performance of the Diagnostic Analyzer for Selective Hybridization (DASH) SARS-CoV-2 POC PCR (sample insertion to result time of 16 minutes), we conducted a cross-sectional study of adults with and without symptoms of COVID-19 at four clinical sites. We collected two bilateral anterior nasal swabs from each participant and information on COVID-19 symptoms, vaccination, and exposure. One swab was tested with the DASH SARS-CoV-2 POC PCR and the second in a central laboratory using Cepheid Xpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2 PCR. We assessed test concordance and calculated sensitivity, specificity, negative and positive predictive values using Xpert as the “gold standard.” RESULTS: We enrolled 315 and analyzed 313 participants with median age 42 years; 65% were female, 62% symptomatic, 75% had received ≥2 doses of mRNA COVID-19 vaccine, and 16% currently COVID-19 positive. There were concordant results for 307 tests indicating an overall agreement for DASH of 0.98 [95% CI 0.96, 0.99] compared to Xpert. DASH performed at 0.96 [95% CI 0.86, 1.00] sensitivity and 0.98 [95% CI 0.96, 1.00] specificity, with a positive predictive value of 0.85 [95% CI 0.73, 0.96] and negative predictive value of 0.996 [95% CI 0.99, 1.00]. The six discordant tests between DASH and Xpert all had high Ct values (>30) on the respective positive assay. DASH and Xpert Ct values were highly correlated (R=0.89 [95% CI 0.81, 0.94]). CONCLUSIONS: DASH POC SARS-CoV-2 PCR was accurate, easy to use, and provided fast results in real-life clinical settings with an overall performance similar to an EUA-approved laboratory-based PCR. Its compact design and ease of use are optimal for a variety of healthcare, and potentially community settings, including areas with lack of access to central laboratory-based PCR testing.