Comparison of the Accula SARS-CoV-2 Test with a Laboratory-Developed Assay for Detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA in Clinical Nasopharyngeal Specimens
- PMID: 32461285
- PMCID: PMC7383558
- DOI: 10.1128/JCM.01072-20
Comparison of the Accula SARS-CoV-2 Test with a Laboratory-Developed Assay for Detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA in Clinical Nasopharyngeal Specimens
Abstract
Several point-of-care (POC) molecular tests have received emergency use authorization (EUA) from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for the diagnosis of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). The test performance characteristics of the Accula (Mesa Biotech) SARS-CoV-2 POC test need to be evaluated to inform its optimal use. The aim of this study was to assess the test performance of the Accula SARS-CoV-2 test. The performance of the Accula test was assessed by comparing results of 100 nasopharyngeal swab samples previously characterized by the Stanford Health Care EUA laboratory-developed test (SHC-LDT), targeting the envelope (E) gene. Assay concordance was assessed by overall percent agreement, positive percent agreement (PPA), negative percent agreement (NPA), and Cohen's kappa coefficient. Overall percent agreement between the assays was 84.0% (95% confidence interval [CI], 75.3 to 90.6%), PPA was 68.0% (95% CI, 53.3 to 80.5%), and the kappa coefficient was 0.68 (95% CI, 0.54 to 0.82). Sixteen specimens detected by the SHC-LDT were not detected by the Accula test and showed low viral load burden, with a median cycle threshold value of 37.7. NPA was 100% (95% CI, 94.2 to 100%). Compared to the SHC-LDT, the Accula SARS-CoV-2 test showed excellent negative agreement. However, positive agreement was low for samples with low viral load. The false-negative rate of the Accula POC test calls for a more thorough evaluation of POC test performance characteristics in clinical settings and for confirmatory testing in individuals with moderate to high pretest probability of SARS-CoV-2 who test negative on Accula.
Keywords: COVID-19; Mesa Accula; SARS-CoV-2; laboratory-developed test; point-of-care test.
Copyright © 2020 American Society for Microbiology.
Figures
Similar articles
-
Comparison of a laboratory-developed test targeting the envelope gene with three nucleic acid amplification tests for detection of SARS-CoV-2.J Clin Virol. 2020 Aug;129:104427. doi: 10.1016/j.jcv.2020.104427. Epub 2020 May 8. J Clin Virol. 2020. PMID: 32535398 Free PMC article.
-
Comparison of the Panther Fusion and a laboratory-developed test targeting the envelope gene for detection of SARS-CoV-2.J Clin Virol. 2020 Jun;127:104383. doi: 10.1016/j.jcv.2020.104383. Epub 2020 Apr 24. J Clin Virol. 2020. PMID: 32353760 Free PMC article.
-
Clinical Evaluation of Three Sample-to-Answer Platforms for Detection of SARS-CoV-2.J Clin Microbiol. 2020 Jul 23;58(8):e00783-20. doi: 10.1128/JCM.00783-20. Print 2020 Jul 23. J Clin Microbiol. 2020. PMID: 32332061 Free PMC article.
-
Understanding, Verifying, and Implementing Emergency Use Authorization Molecular Diagnostics for the Detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA.J Clin Microbiol. 2020 Jul 23;58(8):e00796-20. doi: 10.1128/JCM.00796-20. Print 2020 Jul 23. J Clin Microbiol. 2020. PMID: 32381642 Free PMC article. Review.
-
SARS-CoV-2 detection in different respiratory sites: A systematic review and meta-analysis.EBioMedicine. 2020 Sep;59:102903. doi: 10.1016/j.ebiom.2020.102903. Epub 2020 Jul 24. EBioMedicine. 2020. PMID: 32718896 Free PMC article.
Cited by
-
FDA authorized molecular point-of-care SARS-CoV-2 tests: A critical review on principles, systems and clinical performances.Biosens Bioelectron X. 2022 Sep;11:100158. doi: 10.1016/j.biosx.2022.100158. Epub 2022 May 21. Biosens Bioelectron X. 2022. PMID: 35619623 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Evolution and Impact of Nucleic Acid Amplification Test (NAAT) for Diagnosis of Coronavirus Disease.Anal Chem. 2024 May 21;96(20):8124-8146. doi: 10.1021/acs.analchem.3c05225. Epub 2024 Apr 30. Anal Chem. 2024. PMID: 38687959 Free PMC article. Review. No abstract available.
-
Nucleic acid amplification tests on respiratory samples for the diagnosis of coronavirus infections: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Clin Microbiol Infect. 2021 Mar;27(3):341-351. doi: 10.1016/j.cmi.2020.11.002. Epub 2020 Nov 11. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2021. PMID: 33188933 Free PMC article.
-
Multicenter Evaluation of the Cepheid Xpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2/Flu/RSV Test.J Clin Microbiol. 2021 Feb 18;59(3):e02955-20. doi: 10.1128/JCM.02955-20. Print 2021 Feb 18. J Clin Microbiol. 2021. PMID: 33298613 Free PMC article.
-
Rapid, point-of-care antigen and molecular-based tests for diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection.Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020 Aug 26;8(8):CD013705. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD013705. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020. Update in: Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2021 Mar 24;3:CD013705. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD013705.pub2. PMID: 32845525 Free PMC article. Updated.
References
-
- Bedford J, Enria D, Giesecke J, Heymann DL, Ihekweazu C, Kobinger G, Lane HC, Memish Z, Oh MD, Sall AA, Schuchat A, Ungchusak K, Wieler LH. 2020. Strategic WHO technical advisory group for infectious H. 2020. COVID-19: towards controlling of a pandemic. Lancet 395:1015–1018. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30673-5. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
-
- Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). 2020. Evaluating and testing persons for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/hcp/clinical-criteria.html. Accessed 13 May 2020.
-
- World Health Organization. 2020. Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) technical guidance: laboratory testing for 2019-nCoV in humans. https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel-coronavirus-2019/technica.... Accessed 7 May 2020.
-
- Food and Drug Administration. 2020. Policy for coronavirus disease-2019 tests during the public health emergency (revised). https://www.fda.gov/regulatory-information/search-fda-guidance-documents.... Accessed 7 May 2020.
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
Miscellaneous