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;93(9):5655-5659.
doi: 10.1002/jmv.27094. Epub 2021 May 31.

Rapid COVID-19 antigenic tests: Usefulness of a modified method for diagnosis

Reza Soleimani  1 , Corentin Deckers  1 , Te-Din Huang  1 , Pierre Bogaerts  1 , Stéphanie Evrard  1 , Isaline Wallemme  1 , Boutaina Habib  1 , Pauline Rouzé  1 , Olivier Denis  1
Affiliations

Rapid COVID-19 antigenic tests: Usefulness of a modified method for diagnosis

Reza Soleimani et al. J Med Virol. 2021 Sep.

Abstract

The current reliable recommended test for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) diagnosis is quantitative reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR). Rapid antigen test devices could be useful as they are less expensive, faster without the need of specialized laboratories to perform the test. We report the performances of two rapid immunochromatographic antigen testing devices compared with RT-qPCR for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) detection in nasopharyngeal samples. We carried out a lateral-flow tests study on 401 nasopharyngeal swab samples from nonduplicated suspected COVID-19 subjects. An equal volume of universal transport medium tubes-containing samples (dilution ratio = 1:15) were added to the manufacturer's extraction buffer solution (dilution ratio = 1:2) and analyzed on BioSpeedia COVID19Speed-Antigen Test and on Abbott Panbio™ COVID-19 Ag Rapid Test, devices. Qualitative results were compared to those obtained by the RT-qPCR (Allplex™ SARS-CoV-2 Assay Seegene). Based on our data, the overall sensitivity for BioSpeedia and Panbio devices was estimated at 65.5% and 75.0%, respectively. The sensitivity was greater for cycle threshold values less than 25 achieving 90.4 and 96.8 for BioSpeedia and Panbio devices, respectively. A perfect specificity of 100.0% was observed for both devices.

Keywords: BioSpeedia; COVID-19; Panbio; RT-qPCR; SARS-CoV-2; antigen.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that there are no conflict of interests.

References

    1. Corman VM, Landt O, Kaiser M, et al. Detection of 2019 novel coronavirus (2019‐nCoV) by real‐time RT‐PCR. Eurosurveillance. 2020;25(3):2000045. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Soleimani R, Khourssaji M, Gruson D, et al. Clinical usefulness of fully automated chemiluminescent immunoassay for quantitative antibody measurements in COVID‐19 patients. J Med Virol. 2020;93:1465‐1477. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Albert E, Torres I, Bueno F, et al. Field evaluation of a rapid antigen test (Panbio COVID‐19 Ag Rapid Test Device) for COVID‐19 diagnosis in primary healthcare centres. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2020;27:472. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Yamayoshi S, Sakai‐Tagawa Y, Koga M, et al. Comparison of rapid antigen tests for COVID‐19. Viruses. 2020;12(12):1420. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Johanna N, Citrawijaya H, Wangge G. Mass screening vs lockdown vs combination of both to control COVID‐19: a systematic review. J Public Health Res. 2020;9(4):2011. - PMC - PubMed

Substances