Diagnostics are fundamental for successful outbreak containment. In this supplement, ‘Diagnostic preparedness for WHO Blueprint pathogens’, we describe specific diagnostic challenges presented by selected priority pathogens most likely to cause future epidemics.Some challenges to diagnostic preparedness are common to all outbreak situations, as highlighted by recent outbreaks of Ebola, Zika and yellow fever. In this article, we review these overarching challenges and explore potential solutions. Challenges include fragmented and unreliable funding pathways, limited access to specimens and reagents, inadequate diagnostic testing capacity at both national and community levels of healthcare and lack of incentives for companies to develop and manufacture diagnostics for priority pathogens during non-outbreak periods. Addressing these challenges in an efficient and effective way will require multiple stakeholders—public and private—coordinated in implementing a holistic approach to diagnostics preparedness. All require strengthening of healthcare system diagnostic capacity (including surveillance and education of healthcare workers), establishment of sustainable financing and market strategies and integration of diagnostics with existing mechanisms. Identifying overlaps in diagnostic development needs across different priority pathogens would allow more timely and cost-effective use of resources than a pathogen by pathogen approach; target product profiles for diagnostics should be refined accordingly. We recommend the establishment of a global forum to bring together representatives from all key stakeholders required for the response to develop a coordinated implementation plan. In addition, we should explore if and how existing mechanisms to address challenges to the vaccines sector, such as Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations and Gavi, could be expanded to cover diagnostics.

The most performing techniques enabling early diagnosis of infectious diseases rely on nucleic acid detection. Today, because of their high technicality and cost, nucleic acid amplification tests (NAAT) are of benefit only to a small fraction of developing countries population. By reducing costs, simplifying procedures and enabling multiplexing, paper microfluidics has the potential to considerably facilitate their accessibility. However, most of the studies performed in this area have not quit the lab. This letter brings NAAT on paper closer to the field, by using clinical samples and operating in a resource-limited setting. We first performed isothermal reverse transcription and Recombinase Polymerase Amplification (RT-RPA) of synthetic Ribonucleic Acid (RNA) of Ebola virus using paper microfluidics devices. We further applied this method in Guinea to detect the presence of Ebola virus in human sample RNA extracts, with minimal facilities (carry-on detection device and freeze-dried reagents on paper). RT-RPA results were available in few minutes and demonstrate a sensitivity of 90.0% compared to the gold-standard RT-PCR on a set of 43 patient samples. Furthermore, the realization of a nine-spot multilayered device achieving the parallel detection of three distinct RNA sequences opens a route toward the detection of multiple viral strains or pathogens.

In the context of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic there has been an increase of the use of antigen-detection rapid diagnostic tests (Ag-RDT). The performance of Ag-RDT vary greatly between manufacturers and evaluating their analytical limit of detection (LOD) has become high priority. Here we describe a manufacturer-independent evaluation of the LOD of 19 marketed Ag-RDT using live SARS-CoV-2 spiked in different matrices: direct culture supernatant, a dry swab, and a swab in Amies. Additionally, the LOD using dry swab was investigated after 7 days’ storage at − 80 °C of the SARS-CoV-2 serial dilutions. An LOD of ≈ 5.0 × 102 pfu/ml (1.0 × 106 genome copies/ml) in culture media is defined as acceptable by the World Health Organization. Fourteen of 19 Ag-RDTs (ActiveXpress, Espline, Excalibur, Innova, Joysbio, Mologic, NowCheck, Orient, PanBio, RespiStrip, Roche, Standard-F, Standard-Q and Sure-Status) exceeded this performance criteria using direct culture supernatant applied to the Ag-RDT. Six Ag-RDT were not compatible with Amies media and a decreased sensitivity of 2 to 20-fold was observed for eleven tests on the stored dilutions at − 80 °C for 7 days. Here, we provide analytical sensitivity data to guide appropriate test and sample type selection for use and for future Ag-RDT evaluations.

The diagnosis of infectious diseases is entering a new and interesting phase. Technologies based on paper microfluidics, coupled to developments in isothermal amplification of Nucleic Acids (NAs) raise opportunities for bringing the methods of molecular biology in the field, in a low setting environment. A lot of work has been performed in the domain over the last few years and the landscape of contributions is rich and diverse. Most often, the level of sample preparation differs, along with the sample nature, the amplification and detection methods, and the design of the device, among other features. In this review, we attempt to offer a structured description of the state of the art. The domain is not mature and there exist bottlenecks that hamper the realization of Nucleic Acid Amplification Tests (NAATs) complying with the constraints of the field in low and middle income countries. In this domain however, the pace of progress is impressively fast. This review is written for a broad Lab on a Chip audience.