Cargando…

Evaluation of diagnostic performance of SARS-CoV-2 detection kits: a comparative study

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has hit many countries worldwide. Rapid and accurate diagnosis is crucial to reduce disease burden. Many commercial kits have become available, but their performance needs to be assessed. This study aimed at evaluation of the diagnostic perfor...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Sherif, Basma, Hafez, Hala M., Abdelhalim, Marwa Ramadan, Elwafa, Menna Allah Zakaria Abou, Wahba, Nancy Samir, Hamdy, Perihan
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9924908/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36819293
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s43088-023-00360-1
_version_ 1784887950854586368
author Sherif, Basma
Hafez, Hala M.
Abdelhalim, Marwa Ramadan
Elwafa, Menna Allah Zakaria Abou
Wahba, Nancy Samir
Hamdy, Perihan
author_facet Sherif, Basma
Hafez, Hala M.
Abdelhalim, Marwa Ramadan
Elwafa, Menna Allah Zakaria Abou
Wahba, Nancy Samir
Hamdy, Perihan
author_sort Sherif, Basma
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has hit many countries worldwide. Rapid and accurate diagnosis is crucial to reduce disease burden. Many commercial kits have become available, but their performance needs to be assessed. This study aimed at evaluation of the diagnostic performance of real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) and Rapid Antigen detection (RAD) kits for detecting Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Five hundred sixty-four Nasopharyngeal swab specimens sent to Molecular Laboratory at Ain Shams University Specialized Hospital for SARS-CoV-2 PCR testing collected from 564 subjects who attended the outpatient clinic for sample collection were randomly selected. All samples were tested for SARS-CoV-2 PCR using Viasure. Each time a recent kit was introduced, 94 samples, previously tested using Viasure, were used to determine the performance characteristics of the recent kit in comparison with Viasure, including Fast Track Diagnostics (FTD), DNA Technology, QiaPrep, Xpress SARS-CoV-2, ID NOW COVID-19 assay and Artron COVID-19 Antigen test kit. RESULTS: Upon comparison, FTD, DNA Technology, QiaPrep, Xpress SARS-CoV-2 and ID Now showed positive percent agreement, 100%, 100%, 97.7%, 100%, 100% negative percent agreement, 86%, 100%, 98.8%, 90%, 100%, respectively. The RAD kit results, when compared with RT-PCR, showed high sensitivity at cycle threshold (Ct) < 30, low sensitivity at Ct ≥ 30, while specificity was 100%. CONCLUSION: Fast track, DNA Technology, QiaPrep, Xpress SARS-CoV-2 and ID Now showed good diagnostic performance. Positive RAD rule in SARS-CoV-2 infection, however negative results should be correlated with clinical condition and molecular testing.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9924908
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Springer Berlin Heidelberg
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-99249082023-02-14 Evaluation of diagnostic performance of SARS-CoV-2 detection kits: a comparative study Sherif, Basma Hafez, Hala M. Abdelhalim, Marwa Ramadan Elwafa, Menna Allah Zakaria Abou Wahba, Nancy Samir Hamdy, Perihan Beni Suef Univ J Basic Appl Sci Research BACKGROUND: Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has hit many countries worldwide. Rapid and accurate diagnosis is crucial to reduce disease burden. Many commercial kits have become available, but their performance needs to be assessed. This study aimed at evaluation of the diagnostic performance of real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) and Rapid Antigen detection (RAD) kits for detecting Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Five hundred sixty-four Nasopharyngeal swab specimens sent to Molecular Laboratory at Ain Shams University Specialized Hospital for SARS-CoV-2 PCR testing collected from 564 subjects who attended the outpatient clinic for sample collection were randomly selected. All samples were tested for SARS-CoV-2 PCR using Viasure. Each time a recent kit was introduced, 94 samples, previously tested using Viasure, were used to determine the performance characteristics of the recent kit in comparison with Viasure, including Fast Track Diagnostics (FTD), DNA Technology, QiaPrep, Xpress SARS-CoV-2, ID NOW COVID-19 assay and Artron COVID-19 Antigen test kit. RESULTS: Upon comparison, FTD, DNA Technology, QiaPrep, Xpress SARS-CoV-2 and ID Now showed positive percent agreement, 100%, 100%, 97.7%, 100%, 100% negative percent agreement, 86%, 100%, 98.8%, 90%, 100%, respectively. The RAD kit results, when compared with RT-PCR, showed high sensitivity at cycle threshold (Ct) < 30, low sensitivity at Ct ≥ 30, while specificity was 100%. CONCLUSION: Fast track, DNA Technology, QiaPrep, Xpress SARS-CoV-2 and ID Now showed good diagnostic performance. Positive RAD rule in SARS-CoV-2 infection, however negative results should be correlated with clinical condition and molecular testing. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2023-02-12 2023 /pmc/articles/PMC9924908/ /pubmed/36819293 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s43088-023-00360-1 Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Research
Sherif, Basma
Hafez, Hala M.
Abdelhalim, Marwa Ramadan
Elwafa, Menna Allah Zakaria Abou
Wahba, Nancy Samir
Hamdy, Perihan
Evaluation of diagnostic performance of SARS-CoV-2 detection kits: a comparative study
title Evaluation of diagnostic performance of SARS-CoV-2 detection kits: a comparative study
title_full Evaluation of diagnostic performance of SARS-CoV-2 detection kits: a comparative study
title_fullStr Evaluation of diagnostic performance of SARS-CoV-2 detection kits: a comparative study
title_full_unstemmed Evaluation of diagnostic performance of SARS-CoV-2 detection kits: a comparative study
title_short Evaluation of diagnostic performance of SARS-CoV-2 detection kits: a comparative study
title_sort evaluation of diagnostic performance of sars-cov-2 detection kits: a comparative study
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9924908/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36819293
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s43088-023-00360-1
work_keys_str_mv AT sherifbasma evaluationofdiagnosticperformanceofsarscov2detectionkitsacomparativestudy
AT hafezhalam evaluationofdiagnosticperformanceofsarscov2detectionkitsacomparativestudy
AT abdelhalimmarwaramadan evaluationofdiagnosticperformanceofsarscov2detectionkitsacomparativestudy
AT elwafamennaallahzakariaabou evaluationofdiagnosticperformanceofsarscov2detectionkitsacomparativestudy
AT wahbanancysamir evaluationofdiagnosticperformanceofsarscov2detectionkitsacomparativestudy
AT hamdyperihan evaluationofdiagnosticperformanceofsarscov2detectionkitsacomparativestudy