Cargando…
Evaluation of SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen diagnostic tests for saliva samples
Using saliva samples would facilitate sample collection, diagnostic feasibility, and mass screening of SARS-CoV-2. We tested two rapid antigen (RAD) immunochromatographic tests designed for detection of SARS-CoV-2 in saliva: Rapid Response™ COVID-19 Antigen Rapid Test Cassette for oral fluids and DI...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Elsevier
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8860750/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35233472 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e08998 |
_version_ | 1784654741603614720 |
---|---|
author | Hagbom, Marie Carmona-Vicente, Noelia Sharma, Sumit Olsson, Henrik Jämtberg, Mikael Nilsdotter-Augustinsson, Åsa Sjöwall, Johanna Nordgren, Johan |
author_facet | Hagbom, Marie Carmona-Vicente, Noelia Sharma, Sumit Olsson, Henrik Jämtberg, Mikael Nilsdotter-Augustinsson, Åsa Sjöwall, Johanna Nordgren, Johan |
author_sort | Hagbom, Marie |
collection | PubMed |
description | Using saliva samples would facilitate sample collection, diagnostic feasibility, and mass screening of SARS-CoV-2. We tested two rapid antigen (RAD) immunochromatographic tests designed for detection of SARS-CoV-2 in saliva: Rapid Response™ COVID-19 Antigen Rapid Test Cassette for oral fluids and DIAGNOS™ COVID-19 Antigen Saliva Test. Evaluation of detection limit was performed with purified SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid protein and live SARS-CoV-2 virus. Sensitivity and specificity were further evaluated with reverse transcription quantitative PCR (RT-qPCR) positive and negative saliva samples from hospitalized individuals with COVID-19 (n = 39) and healthcare workers (n = 20). DIAGNOS showed higher sensitivity than Rapid Response for both nucleocapsid protein and live virus. The limit of detection of the saliva test from DIAGNOS was further comparable with the Abbott Panbio™ COVID-19 Ag Rapid Test designed for nasopharyngeal samples. DIAGNOS and Rapid Response detected nine (50.0%) and seven (38.9%), respectively, of the 18 RT-qPCR positive saliva samples. All RT-qPCR negative saliva (n = 41) were negative with both tests. Only one of the RT-qPCR positive saliva samples contained infectious virus as determined by cell culture and was also positive using the saliva RADs. The results show that the DIAGNOS may be an important and easy-to-use saliva RAD complement to detect SARS-CoV-2 positive individuals, but validation with a larger sample set is warranted. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8860750 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Elsevier |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-88607502022-02-22 Evaluation of SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen diagnostic tests for saliva samples Hagbom, Marie Carmona-Vicente, Noelia Sharma, Sumit Olsson, Henrik Jämtberg, Mikael Nilsdotter-Augustinsson, Åsa Sjöwall, Johanna Nordgren, Johan Heliyon Research Article Using saliva samples would facilitate sample collection, diagnostic feasibility, and mass screening of SARS-CoV-2. We tested two rapid antigen (RAD) immunochromatographic tests designed for detection of SARS-CoV-2 in saliva: Rapid Response™ COVID-19 Antigen Rapid Test Cassette for oral fluids and DIAGNOS™ COVID-19 Antigen Saliva Test. Evaluation of detection limit was performed with purified SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid protein and live SARS-CoV-2 virus. Sensitivity and specificity were further evaluated with reverse transcription quantitative PCR (RT-qPCR) positive and negative saliva samples from hospitalized individuals with COVID-19 (n = 39) and healthcare workers (n = 20). DIAGNOS showed higher sensitivity than Rapid Response for both nucleocapsid protein and live virus. The limit of detection of the saliva test from DIAGNOS was further comparable with the Abbott Panbio™ COVID-19 Ag Rapid Test designed for nasopharyngeal samples. DIAGNOS and Rapid Response detected nine (50.0%) and seven (38.9%), respectively, of the 18 RT-qPCR positive saliva samples. All RT-qPCR negative saliva (n = 41) were negative with both tests. Only one of the RT-qPCR positive saliva samples contained infectious virus as determined by cell culture and was also positive using the saliva RADs. The results show that the DIAGNOS may be an important and easy-to-use saliva RAD complement to detect SARS-CoV-2 positive individuals, but validation with a larger sample set is warranted. Elsevier 2022-02-22 /pmc/articles/PMC8860750/ /pubmed/35233472 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e08998 Text en © 2022 The Author(s) https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Research Article Hagbom, Marie Carmona-Vicente, Noelia Sharma, Sumit Olsson, Henrik Jämtberg, Mikael Nilsdotter-Augustinsson, Åsa Sjöwall, Johanna Nordgren, Johan Evaluation of SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen diagnostic tests for saliva samples |
title | Evaluation of SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen diagnostic tests for saliva samples |
title_full | Evaluation of SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen diagnostic tests for saliva samples |
title_fullStr | Evaluation of SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen diagnostic tests for saliva samples |
title_full_unstemmed | Evaluation of SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen diagnostic tests for saliva samples |
title_short | Evaluation of SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen diagnostic tests for saliva samples |
title_sort | evaluation of sars-cov-2 rapid antigen diagnostic tests for saliva samples |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8860750/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35233472 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e08998 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT hagbommarie evaluationofsarscov2rapidantigendiagnostictestsforsalivasamples AT carmonavicentenoelia evaluationofsarscov2rapidantigendiagnostictestsforsalivasamples AT sharmasumit evaluationofsarscov2rapidantigendiagnostictestsforsalivasamples AT olssonhenrik evaluationofsarscov2rapidantigendiagnostictestsforsalivasamples AT jamtbergmikael evaluationofsarscov2rapidantigendiagnostictestsforsalivasamples AT nilsdotteraugustinssonasa evaluationofsarscov2rapidantigendiagnostictestsforsalivasamples AT sjowalljohanna evaluationofsarscov2rapidantigendiagnostictestsforsalivasamples AT nordgrenjohan evaluationofsarscov2rapidantigendiagnostictestsforsalivasamples |