False‐positive results in SARS‐CoV‐2 antigen test with rhinovirus‐A infection

Abstract

Fig. S1. Number of third-generation cephalosporin-susceptible and resistant pneumococcal meningitis cases. Susceptible: third-generation cephalosporin-susceptible; resistant: third-generation cephalosporin-resistant; PCV7 was introduced in 2010, and PCV13 was introduced 2013. The patients have been decreasing since introduction of vaccination.Table S1. Characteristics of patients infected with third-generation cephalosporin-susceptible and third-generation cephalosporin-resistant pneumococcal isolates.

Potential for false-positive results with quantitative antigen tests for SARS-CoV-2: A case of a child with acute respiratory infection

“…One study reported three pediatric false-positive cases with the rapid antigen test Espline SARS-CoV-2 (Fujirebio, Tokyo, Japan) with rhinovirus infections. In these cases, film array revealed HRV/enterovirus infections, and human rhinovirus typeA was confirmed by RT-PCR with sequencing [5]. Another study reported three pediatric patients tested false positive for the same rapid antigen test and were later found to have had rhinovirus infections [4].…”

“…While they are convenient, false-positive results with RATs have been reported [4][5][6]. False-positive RATs results cause unnecessary isolation and increase in the burden of medical staff in facilities [4,5].…”

“…While they are convenient, false-positive results with RATs have been reported [4][5][6]. False-positive RATs results cause unnecessary isolation and increase in the burden of medical staff in facilities [4,5]. Several cases of false-positive RATs based on immunochromatography have been reported with detailed clinical information [4,5]; however, false-positive cases for the quantitative antigen test are rare.…”

“…False-positive RATs results cause unnecessary isolation and increase in the burden of medical staff in facilities [4,5]. Several cases of false-positive RATs based on immunochromatography have been reported with detailed clinical information [4,5]; however, false-positive cases for the quantitative antigen test are rare. Only one false-positive case has been reported with patient information in the literature [6].…”

Evaluation and clinical implications of the time to a positive results of antigen testing for SARS-CoV-2

“…First, it did not include patients who were confirmed to be negative for SARS-CoV-2 by RT-PCR. Some antigen tests have been reported to show false positives [ 20 , 21 ], and their likelihood may be influenced by shortened judgment times; however, this issue was not evaluated in this study. Further, we could not compare the specificities of QuickNavi™-COVID19 Ag and the DIA evaluated.…”