There is a great demand for more rapid tests for SARS‐CoV‐2 detection to reduce waiting time, boost public health strategies for combating disease, decrease costs, and prevent overwhelming laboratory capacities. This study was conducted to assess the performance of 10 lateral flow device viral antigen immunoassays for the detection of SARS‐CoV‐2 in nasopharyngeal swab specimens. We analyzed 231 nasopharyngeal samples collected from October 2020 to December 2020, from suspected COVID‐19 cases and contacts of positive cases at Biotechnology Research Center laboratories, Tripoli, Libya. The performance of 10 COVID‐19 Antigen (Ag) rapid test devices for the detection of SARS‐CoV‐2 antigen was compared to a quantitative reverse transcription‐polymerase chain reaction (RT‐qPCR). In this study, 161 cases had symptoms consistent with COVID‐19. The mean duration from symptom onset was 6.6 ± 4.3 days. The median cycle threshold ( C t ) of positive samples was 25. Among the 108 positive samples detected by RT‐qPCR, the COVID‐19 antigen (Ag) tests detected 83 cases correctly. All rapid Ag test devices used in this study showed 100% specificity. While tests from six manufacturers had an overall sensitivity range from 75% to 100%, the remaining four tests had a sensitivity of 50%–71.43%. Sensitivity during the first 6 days of symptoms and in samples with high viral loads ( C t < 25), was 100% in all but two of the test platforms. False‐negative samples had a median C t of 34 and an average duration of onset of symptoms of 11.3 days (range = 5–20 days). Antigen test diagnosis has high sensitivity and specificity in early disease when patients present less than 7 days of symptom onset. Patients are encouraged to test as soon as they get COVID‐19‐related symptoms within 1 week and to seek medical advice within 24 h if they develop disturbed smell/taste. The use of rapid antigen tests is important for controlling the COVID‐19 pandemic and reducing the burden on molecular diagnostic laboratories.
Background: There is a great demand for more rapid tests for SARS-COV-2 detection to reduce waiting time, boost public health strategies for combating disease, decrease costs, and prevent overwhelming laboratory capacities. This study was conducted to assess the performance of 10 antigen-based rapid assays for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 in nasopharyngeal swab specimens. Methods: We analyzed 231 nasopharyngeal samples collected from October 2020-December 2020, from suspected COVID-19 cases and contacts of positive cases at Biotechnology Research Center laboratories, Tripoli, Libya. The performance of 10 COVID-19 Ag rapid test devices (Fluorecare, ESPLINE, RapiGen, Abbott Panbio, Flowflex, Acon, Assut Europe, Orient Gene, CerTest, Bioperfectus, AMP) for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 antigen was compared to RT-qPCR. Results: Among the 108 positive samples detected by RT-qPCR, the COVID-19 antigen (Ag) tests detected 83, giving a sensitivity of 76.85% (95% CI, 67.75- 84.43). 161 patients were symptomatic. The median cycle threshold was 25. The mean duration from symptom onset was 6.6 plus/minus 4.3 days. Sensitivity and specificity during the first 6 days of symptoms and in samples with high viral loads ct<25, was 96.4%. No false positives were detected by any of the Ag tests utilized in this study. False negative samples had a median Ct of 34 and average duration of onset of symptoms of 11.3 days (range=5-20). Conclusions: Rapid antigen test diagnosis has high sensitivity and specificity in early disease when patients present less than 7 days of symptom onset. Patients are encouraged to test as soon as they get COVID-19 related symptoms within 1 week and to seek medical advice within 24 hrs. if they develop disturbed smell/taste. The use of rapid antigen tests is important for controlling COVID-19 pandemic and reducing burden on molecular diagnostic laboratories.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.