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
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
