Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2021 Sep;53(9):661-668.
doi: 10.1080/23744235.2021.1914857. Epub 2021 May 14.

Covid-19 antigen testing: better than we know? A test accuracy study

Affiliations

Covid-19 antigen testing: better than we know? A test accuracy study

Miroslav Homza et al. Infect Dis (Lond). 2021 Sep.

Abstract

Background: Antigen testing for SARS-CoV-2 is considered to be less sensitive than the standard reference method - real-time PCR (RT-PCR). It has been suggested that many patients with positive RT-PCR 'missed' by antigen testing might be non-infectious.

Methods: In a real-world high-throughput setting for asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic patients, 494 patients were tested using RT-PCR as well as a single lateral flow antigen test (Ecotest, AssureTech, China). Where the results differed, virus viability was evaluated by cell culture. The test parameters were calculated with RT-PCR and RT-PCR adjusted on viability as reference standards.

Results: The overall sensitivity of the used antigen test related to the RT-PCR only was 76.2%, specificity was 97.3%. However, 36 out of 39 patients 'missed' by the antigen test contained no viable virus. After adjusting on that, the sensitivity grew to 97.7% and, more importantly for disease control purposes, the negative predictive value reached 99.2%.

Conclusions: We propose that viability testing should be always performed when evaluating a new antigen test. A well-chosen and validated antigen test provides excellent results in identifying patients who are shedding viable virus (although some caveats still remain) in the real-world high-throughput setting of asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic individuals.

Keywords: Covid-19; SARS-CoV-2; antigen testing; sensitivity; virus shedding; virus viability.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

All Authors declare that they have no conflict of interest regarding the research presented in this paper

References

    1. ECDC (European Centre for Disease Control). Options for the use of rapid antigen tests for COVID-19 in the EU/EEA and the UK: ECDC, 2020. [cited 2020 Dec 30]. Available from: https://www.ecdc.europa.eu/en/publications-data/options-use-rapid-antige...
    1. European Commission . Commission recommendation of 28.10.2020 on COVID-19 testing strategies, including the use of rapid antigen tests. Brussels (Belgium): European Commission; 2020.
    1. Dinnes J, Deeks JJ, Adriano A, et al. . Rapid, point-of-care antigen and molecular-based tests for diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2021;3:CD013705. - PMC - PubMed
    1. World Health Organization. Antigen-detection in the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection using rapid immunoassays: interim guidance, 11 September 2020. Geneva (Switzerland): World Health Organization, 2020. 4
    1. Porte L, Legarraga P, Vollrath V, et al. . Evaluation of a novel antigen-based rapid detection test for the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 in respiratory samples. Int J Infect Dis. 2020; 99:328–333. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

Substances