Cargando…

A method comparison study of the high throughput automated HISCL® SARS‐CoV‐2 antigen assay using nasopharyngeal swab samples from symptomatic and asymptomatic subjects against conventional RT‐PCR

Our study aim was to evaluate the performance of the automated Sysmex HISCL® severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2) antigen assay against reverse‐transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT‐PCR). We tested 277 remnant frozen nasopharyngeal swab samples, stored in universal tran...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Linssen, Joachim, Schapendonk, Claire, Münster, Marion, Daemen, Paul, Rahamat‐Langendoen, Janette, Wertheim, Heiman
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9088525/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35218042
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jmv.27679
Descripción
Sumario:Our study aim was to evaluate the performance of the automated Sysmex HISCL® severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2) antigen assay against reverse‐transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT‐PCR). We tested 277 remnant frozen nasopharyngeal swab samples, stored in universal transport medium (UTM), yielding a sensitivity of 94.9% against historical RT‐PCR results with cycle threshold (C (t)) < 30, and a sensitivity of 76.7% for C (t) < 35, and specificity of 100% (all C (t) values) confirming compatibility of UTM‐diluted samples with the assay system. Thereafter, we prospectively collected 141 nasopharyngeal swab samples in UTM from healthcare workers and 1369 paired swabs (400 UTM; 969 dry) from individuals at a public health testing center, with the first swab (UTM) reserved for RT‐PCR, yielding a positivity rate of 4.6%. HISCL assay performance using UTM swabs was superior to dry swabs, with a sensitivity of 100% (95% confidence interval [CI] 71.5%–100%) at C (t) < 30 versus 92.3% (95%CI 81.5%–97.9%), and a specificity of 99.3% (95% CI 98.1–99.89) against 83.3% (95%CI 80.7%–85.6%). We conclude that this antigen assay is suitable for high throughput facilities where the primary indication for testing is to rule out infection with low RT‐PCR C (t) values (proxy for high viral loads) to curb viral spread.