Field evaluation of COVID-19 antigen tests versus RNA based detection: Potential lower sensitivity compensated by immediate results, technical simplicity, and low cost

dc.contributor.authorMatsuda, Elaine Monteiro
dc.contributor.authorCampos, Ivana Barros de
dc.contributor.authorOliveira, Isabela Penteriche de [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorColpas, Daniela Rodrigues
dc.contributor.authorCarmo, Andreia Moreira dos Santos
dc.contributor.authorBrigido, Luis Fernando de Macedo
dc.contributor.institutionSanto Andre Hlth Secretary
dc.contributor.institutionAdolfo Lutz Inst
dc.contributor.institutionUniversidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp)
dc.date.accessioned2021-06-25T11:56:07Z
dc.date.available2021-06-25T11:56:07Z
dc.date.issued2021-04-08
dc.description.abstractOne year into the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, diagnostic strategies, although central for contact tracing and other preventive measures, are still limited. To meet the global demand, lower cost and faster antigen tests for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) detection are a convenient alternative to the gold standard reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) assay. We tested laboratory-based RT-PCR RNA detection and two rapid antigen detection (RAD) tests, based on the immunochromatography test for nucleocapsid protein of SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19 Ag ECO Test, ECO Diagnostica, and Panbio COVID-19 Ag Rapid Test Abbott). Paired collection and testing were done in a small prospective open study in three clinical services in Sao Paulo, constituted of mostly symptomatic volunteers at collection (97%, 109/112) for a median of 4 days (interquartile range: 3-6), ranging from 1 to 30. Among the 108 paired RT-PCR/RAD tests, results were concordant in 96.4% (101/108). The test's performance was comparable, with an overall sensitivity of 87% and a specificity of 96%. These observations add to other data that suggest that antigen tests may provide reasonable sensitivity and specificity and deserve a role to improve testing strategies, especially in resource-limited settings.en
dc.description.affiliationSanto Andre Hlth Secretary, Infect Dis Outpatient Clin, Santo Andre, SP, Brazil
dc.description.affiliationAdolfo Lutz Inst, Santo Andre Reg Ctr, Santo Andre, SP, Brazil
dc.description.affiliationSao Paulo State Univ, Bioproc & Biotecnol Engn, Botucatu, SP, Brazil
dc.description.affiliationAdolfo Lutz Inst, Virol Ctr, Ave Dr Arnaldo 355, BR-01246000 Sao Paulo, SP, Brazil
dc.description.affiliationUnespSao Paulo State Univ, Bioproc & Biotecnol Engn, Botucatu, SP, Brazil
dc.description.sponsorshipConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq)
dc.description.sponsorshipFundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP)
dc.description.sponsorshipIdCNPq: 442776/2019-5
dc.description.sponsorshipIdFAPESP: 2018/14384-9
dc.format.extent6
dc.identifierhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jmv.26985
dc.identifier.citationJournal Of Medical Virology. Hoboken: Wiley, 6 p., 2021.
dc.identifier.doi10.1002/jmv.26985
dc.identifier.issn0146-6615
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11449/209317
dc.identifier.wosWOS:000637681200001
dc.language.isoeng
dc.publisherWiley-Blackwell
dc.relation.ispartofJournal Of Medical Virology
dc.sourceWeb of Science
dc.subjectCOVID&#8208
dc.subject19
dc.subjectdiagnostic
dc.subjectgargle lavage
dc.subjectnasopharyngeal swab
dc.subjectrapid antigen detection
dc.subjectSARS&#8208
dc.subjectCoV&#8208
dc.subject2
dc.titleField evaluation of COVID-19 antigen tests versus RNA based detection: Potential lower sensitivity compensated by immediate results, technical simplicity, and low costen
dc.typeArtigo
dcterms.licensehttp://olabout.wiley.com/WileyCDA/Section/id-406071.html
dcterms.rightsHolderWiley-Blackwell
unesp.author.orcid0000-0003-2202-0443[3]

Arquivos

Coleções