Cargando…

Performance of point-of care molecular and antigen-based tests for SARS-CoV-2: a living systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND: Molecular and antigen point-of-care tests (POCTs) have augmented our ability to rapidly identify and manage SARS-CoV-2 infection. However, their clinical performance varies among individual studies. OBJECTIVES: The evaluation of the performance of molecular and antigen-based POCTs in con...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Fragkou, Paraskevi C., Moschopoulos, Charalampos D., Dimopoulou, Dimitra, Ong, David S.Y., Dimopoulou, Konstantina, Nelson, Philipp P., Schweitzer, Valentijn A., Janocha, Hannah, Karofylakis, Emmanouil, Papathanasiou, Konstantinos A., Tsiordras, Sotirios, De Angelis, Giulia, Thölken, Clemens, Sanguinetti, Maurizio, Chung, Ho-Ryun, Skevaki, Chrysanthi
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases. Published by Elsevier Ltd. 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9660861/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36336237
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cmi.2022.10.028
_version_ 1784830439610908672
author Fragkou, Paraskevi C.
Moschopoulos, Charalampos D.
Dimopoulou, Dimitra
Ong, David S.Y.
Dimopoulou, Konstantina
Nelson, Philipp P.
Schweitzer, Valentijn A.
Janocha, Hannah
Karofylakis, Emmanouil
Papathanasiou, Konstantinos A.
Tsiordras, Sotirios
De Angelis, Giulia
Thölken, Clemens
Sanguinetti, Maurizio
Chung, Ho-Ryun
Skevaki, Chrysanthi
author_facet Fragkou, Paraskevi C.
Moschopoulos, Charalampos D.
Dimopoulou, Dimitra
Ong, David S.Y.
Dimopoulou, Konstantina
Nelson, Philipp P.
Schweitzer, Valentijn A.
Janocha, Hannah
Karofylakis, Emmanouil
Papathanasiou, Konstantinos A.
Tsiordras, Sotirios
De Angelis, Giulia
Thölken, Clemens
Sanguinetti, Maurizio
Chung, Ho-Ryun
Skevaki, Chrysanthi
author_sort Fragkou, Paraskevi C.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Molecular and antigen point-of-care tests (POCTs) have augmented our ability to rapidly identify and manage SARS-CoV-2 infection. However, their clinical performance varies among individual studies. OBJECTIVES: The evaluation of the performance of molecular and antigen-based POCTs in confirmed, suspected, or probable COVID-19 cases compared with that of laboratory-based RT-PCR in real-life settings. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE/PubMed, Scopus, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Cochrane COVID-19 study register, and COVID-19 Living Evidence Database from the University of Bern. STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Peer-reviewed or preprint observational studies or randomized controlled trials that evaluated any type of commercially available antigen and/or molecular POCTs for SARS-CoV-2, including multiplex PCR panels, approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration, with Emergency Use Authorization, and/or marked with Conformitè Europëenne from European Commission/European Union. PARTICIPANTS: Close contacts and/or patients with symptomatic and/or asymptomatic confirmed, suspected, or probable COVID-19 infection of any age. TEST/S: Molecular and/or antigen-based SARS-CoV-2 POCTs. REFERENCE STANDARD: Laboratory-based SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR. ASSESSMENT OF RISK OF BIAS: Eligible studies were subjected to quality-control and risk-of-bias assessment using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 tool. METHODS OF DATA SYNTHESIS: Summary sensitivities and specificities with their 95% CIs were estimated using a bivariate model. Subgroup analysis was performed when at least three studies informed the outcome. RESULTS: A total of 123 eligible publications (97 and 26 studies assessing antigen-based and molecular POCTs, respectively) were retrieved from 4674 initial records. The pooled sensitivity and specificity for 13 molecular-based POCTs were 92.8% (95% CI, 88.9–95.4%) and 97.6% (95% CI, 96.6–98.3%), respectively. The sensitivity of antigen-based POCTs pooled from 138 individual evaluations was considerably lower than that of molecular POCTs; the pooled sensitivity and specificity rates were 70.6% (95% CI, 67.2–73.8%) and 98.9% (95% CI, 98.5–99.2%), respectively. DISCUSSION: Further studies are needed to evaluate the performance of molecular and antigen-based POCTs in underrepresented patient subgroups and different respiratory samples.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9660861
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases. Published by Elsevier Ltd.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-96608612022-11-14 Performance of point-of care molecular and antigen-based tests for SARS-CoV-2: a living systematic review and meta-analysis Fragkou, Paraskevi C. Moschopoulos, Charalampos D. Dimopoulou, Dimitra Ong, David S.Y. Dimopoulou, Konstantina Nelson, Philipp P. Schweitzer, Valentijn A. Janocha, Hannah Karofylakis, Emmanouil Papathanasiou, Konstantinos A. Tsiordras, Sotirios De Angelis, Giulia Thölken, Clemens Sanguinetti, Maurizio Chung, Ho-Ryun Skevaki, Chrysanthi Clin Microbiol Infect Systematic Review BACKGROUND: Molecular and antigen point-of-care tests (POCTs) have augmented our ability to rapidly identify and manage SARS-CoV-2 infection. However, their clinical performance varies among individual studies. OBJECTIVES: The evaluation of the performance of molecular and antigen-based POCTs in confirmed, suspected, or probable COVID-19 cases compared with that of laboratory-based RT-PCR in real-life settings. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE/PubMed, Scopus, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Cochrane COVID-19 study register, and COVID-19 Living Evidence Database from the University of Bern. STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Peer-reviewed or preprint observational studies or randomized controlled trials that evaluated any type of commercially available antigen and/or molecular POCTs for SARS-CoV-2, including multiplex PCR panels, approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration, with Emergency Use Authorization, and/or marked with Conformitè Europëenne from European Commission/European Union. PARTICIPANTS: Close contacts and/or patients with symptomatic and/or asymptomatic confirmed, suspected, or probable COVID-19 infection of any age. TEST/S: Molecular and/or antigen-based SARS-CoV-2 POCTs. REFERENCE STANDARD: Laboratory-based SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR. ASSESSMENT OF RISK OF BIAS: Eligible studies were subjected to quality-control and risk-of-bias assessment using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 tool. METHODS OF DATA SYNTHESIS: Summary sensitivities and specificities with their 95% CIs were estimated using a bivariate model. Subgroup analysis was performed when at least three studies informed the outcome. RESULTS: A total of 123 eligible publications (97 and 26 studies assessing antigen-based and molecular POCTs, respectively) were retrieved from 4674 initial records. The pooled sensitivity and specificity for 13 molecular-based POCTs were 92.8% (95% CI, 88.9–95.4%) and 97.6% (95% CI, 96.6–98.3%), respectively. The sensitivity of antigen-based POCTs pooled from 138 individual evaluations was considerably lower than that of molecular POCTs; the pooled sensitivity and specificity rates were 70.6% (95% CI, 67.2–73.8%) and 98.9% (95% CI, 98.5–99.2%), respectively. DISCUSSION: Further studies are needed to evaluate the performance of molecular and antigen-based POCTs in underrepresented patient subgroups and different respiratory samples. European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases. Published by Elsevier Ltd. 2023-03 2022-11-03 /pmc/articles/PMC9660861/ /pubmed/36336237 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cmi.2022.10.028 Text en © 2022 European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Since January 2020 Elsevier has created a COVID-19 resource centre with free information in English and Mandarin on the novel coronavirus COVID-19. The COVID-19 resource centre is hosted on Elsevier Connect, the company's public news and information website. Elsevier hereby grants permission to make all its COVID-19-related research that is available on the COVID-19 resource centre - including this research content - immediately available in PubMed Central and other publicly funded repositories, such as the WHO COVID database with rights for unrestricted research re-use and analyses in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for free by Elsevier for as long as the COVID-19 resource centre remains active.
spellingShingle Systematic Review
Fragkou, Paraskevi C.
Moschopoulos, Charalampos D.
Dimopoulou, Dimitra
Ong, David S.Y.
Dimopoulou, Konstantina
Nelson, Philipp P.
Schweitzer, Valentijn A.
Janocha, Hannah
Karofylakis, Emmanouil
Papathanasiou, Konstantinos A.
Tsiordras, Sotirios
De Angelis, Giulia
Thölken, Clemens
Sanguinetti, Maurizio
Chung, Ho-Ryun
Skevaki, Chrysanthi
Performance of point-of care molecular and antigen-based tests for SARS-CoV-2: a living systematic review and meta-analysis
title Performance of point-of care molecular and antigen-based tests for SARS-CoV-2: a living systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full Performance of point-of care molecular and antigen-based tests for SARS-CoV-2: a living systematic review and meta-analysis
title_fullStr Performance of point-of care molecular and antigen-based tests for SARS-CoV-2: a living systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full_unstemmed Performance of point-of care molecular and antigen-based tests for SARS-CoV-2: a living systematic review and meta-analysis
title_short Performance of point-of care molecular and antigen-based tests for SARS-CoV-2: a living systematic review and meta-analysis
title_sort performance of point-of care molecular and antigen-based tests for sars-cov-2: a living systematic review and meta-analysis
topic Systematic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9660861/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36336237
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cmi.2022.10.028
work_keys_str_mv AT fragkouparaskevic performanceofpointofcaremolecularandantigenbasedtestsforsarscov2alivingsystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT moschopouloscharalamposd performanceofpointofcaremolecularandantigenbasedtestsforsarscov2alivingsystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT dimopouloudimitra performanceofpointofcaremolecularandantigenbasedtestsforsarscov2alivingsystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT ongdavidsy performanceofpointofcaremolecularandantigenbasedtestsforsarscov2alivingsystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT dimopouloukonstantina performanceofpointofcaremolecularandantigenbasedtestsforsarscov2alivingsystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT nelsonphilippp performanceofpointofcaremolecularandantigenbasedtestsforsarscov2alivingsystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT schweitzervalentijna performanceofpointofcaremolecularandantigenbasedtestsforsarscov2alivingsystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT janochahannah performanceofpointofcaremolecularandantigenbasedtestsforsarscov2alivingsystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT karofylakisemmanouil performanceofpointofcaremolecularandantigenbasedtestsforsarscov2alivingsystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT papathanasioukonstantinosa performanceofpointofcaremolecularandantigenbasedtestsforsarscov2alivingsystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT tsiordrassotirios performanceofpointofcaremolecularandantigenbasedtestsforsarscov2alivingsystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT deangelisgiulia performanceofpointofcaremolecularandantigenbasedtestsforsarscov2alivingsystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT tholkenclemens performanceofpointofcaremolecularandantigenbasedtestsforsarscov2alivingsystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT sanguinettimaurizio performanceofpointofcaremolecularandantigenbasedtestsforsarscov2alivingsystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT chunghoryun performanceofpointofcaremolecularandantigenbasedtestsforsarscov2alivingsystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT skevakichrysanthi performanceofpointofcaremolecularandantigenbasedtestsforsarscov2alivingsystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT performanceofpointofcaremolecularandantigenbasedtestsforsarscov2alivingsystematicreviewandmetaanalysis