Evaluation of Analytical Performance of Seven Rapid Antigen Detection Kits for Detection of SARS-CoV-2 Virus
Open Access
- 1 February 2021
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Taylor & Francis Ltd in International Journal of General Medicine
- Vol. ume 14, 435-440
- https://doi.org/10.2147/ijgm.s297762
Abstract
Background: Early diagnosis of the novel coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19) in asymptomatic and symptomatic patients is crucial to identify infectious individuals and to help prevent the spread of the virus in the community. Several assays have been developed and are in use in today’s clinical practice. These assays vary in their analytical and clinical performance. For an accurate diagnosis, medical professionals must become more familiar with the test’s utility to select the most appropriate test. This study aims to evaluate the analytical performance of rapid antigen tests used for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 viral antigen compared to RT-PCR SARS-CoV-2 molecular assay. Methods: Oropharyngeal swab specimens from five COVID-19 patients were tested by seven rapid antigen tests developed by different IVD companies. RT-PCR to detect specific RNA fragments of SARS-CoV-2 was used as a confirmatory test. The cycle threshold (Ct) value, which often reflects viral load, in these specimens ranged from 15 to 35. For the analytical evaluation, extraction fluid of each antigen kit was spiked with attenuated ATCC virus at different concentrations ranging from 4.6x104/mL to 7.5x105/mL and tested with antigen testing kits. Results: Out of five confirmed positive SARS-CoV-2 specimens by RT-PCR, only one sample showed a positive result by one of the seven evaluated antigen testing kits. The positive result was observed in the specimen with a Ct value of 15. All other evaluated rapid tests were negative for all five positive specimens. This was further confirmed with the spiking study using ATCC attenuated virus, where extraction fluid of each rapid test was spiked with concentrations ranging from 4.6x104/mL to 7.5x105/mL. None of these spiked specimens showed positive results, indicating very low sensitivity of these antigen kits. Conclusion: This comparison study shows that rapid antigen tests are less sensitive than RT-PCR tests and are not reliable tests for testing asymptomatic patients, who often carry low viral load. Analytical performance of rapid antigen tests should be thoroughly evaluated before implementing it at clinical decision level.Keywords
This publication has 15 references indexed in Scilit:
- Current Status of Laboratory Diagnosis for COVID-19: A Narrative ReviewInfection and Drug Resistance, 2020
- COVID-19: Clinical aspects and therapeutics responsesSaudi Pharmaceutical Journal, 2020
- Low performance of rapid antigen detection test as frontline testing for COVID-19 diagnosisJournal of Clinical Virology, 2020
- SARS-CoV-2 detection in different respiratory sites: A systematic review and meta-analysisEBioMedicine, 2020
- Evaluation of a Rapid Diagnostic Assay for Detection of SARS-CoV-2 Antigen in Nasopharyngeal SwabsJournal of Clinical Microbiology, 2020
- Syrian hamsters as a small animal model for SARS-CoV-2 infection and countermeasure developmentProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2020
- Laboratory diagnosis of coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19)Clinica Chimica Acta; International Journal of Clinical Chemistry, 2020
- Evaluation of rapid antigen test for detection of SARS-CoV-2 virusJournal of Clinical Virology, 2020
- Laboratory Diagnosis of COVID-19: Current Issues and ChallengesJournal of Clinical Microbiology, 2020
- Molecular, serological, and biochemical diagnosis and monitoring of COVID-19: IFCC taskforce evaluation of the latest evidencecclm, 2020