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 May 13;10(10):2099.
doi: 10.3390/jcm10102099.

Accuracy of a Novel SARS-CoV-2 Antigen-Detecting Rapid Diagnostic Test from Standardized Self-Collected Anterior Nasal Swabs

Affiliations

Accuracy of a Novel SARS-CoV-2 Antigen-Detecting Rapid Diagnostic Test from Standardized Self-Collected Anterior Nasal Swabs

Bilgin Osmanodja et al. J Clin Med. .

Abstract

Background Antigen-detecting rapid diagnostic tests (Ag-RDT) for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) offer new opportunities for the quick and laboratory-independent identification of infected individuals for control of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Despite the potential benefits, nasopharyngeal sample collection is frequently perceived as uncomfortable by patients and requires trained healthcare personnel with protective equipment. Therefore, anterior nasal self-sampling is increasingly recognized as a valuable alternative. Methods We performed a prospective, single-center, point of care validation of an Ag-RDT using a polypropylene absorbent collector for standardized self-collected anterior nasal swabs. Real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from combined oropharyngeal/nasopharyngeal swabs served as a comparator. Primary endpoint was sensitivity of the standardized Ag-RDT in symptomatic patients with medium or high viral concentration (≥1 million RNA copies on RT-PCR for SARS-CoV-2). Results Between 12 February and 22 March 2021, 388 participants were enrolled. After exclusion of 9 patients for which no PCR result could be obtained, the novel Ag-RDT was evaluated based on 379 participants, of whom 273 were symptomatic and 106 asymptomatic. In 61 samples from symptomatic patients with medium or high viral load (≥1 million RNA copies), the sensitivity of the standardized Ag-RDT was 96.7% (59/61; 95% confidence interval (CI): 88.7-99.6%) for the primary endpoint. In total, 62 positive Ag-RDT results were detected out of 70 RT-PCR positive individuals, yielding an overall sensitivity of 88.6% (95% CI: 78.7-94.9%). Specificity was 99.7% (95% CI: 98.2-100%) in 309 RT-PCR negative individuals. Conclusions Here, we present a validation of a novel Ag-RDT with a standardized sampling process for anterior nasal self-collection, which meets World Health Organisation (WHO) criteria of ≥80% sensitivity and ≥97% specificity. Although less sensitive than RT-PCR, this assay could be beneficial due to its rapid results, ease of use, and suitability for standardized self-testing.

Keywords: COVID-19; COVID-19 diagnostic testing; SARS-COV-2 antigen testing; SARS-CoV-2.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no competing interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Sample collection-on the left, the test kit comprising a test cassette (1) and a removable sample collector (2) are shown. On the right, the sampling procedure is shown schematically.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Participant flow diagram. RT-PCR: Real-time polymerase chain reaction; Ag-RDT: Antigen-detecting rapid diagnostic tests.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Bar plot showing Ag-RDT results and the corresponding Ct-values of 70 real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) positive patients. Ct—Cycle threshold, ag RDT (antigen rapid diagnostic tests), neg—negative, pos—positive.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Foundation of Innovative New Diagnostics (FIND) SARS-COV-2 Diagnostics Pipeline. [(accessed on 13 May 2021)]; Available online: http://www.finddx.org/covid-19/pipeline/
    1. SARS-CoV-2 Antigen-Detecting Rapid Diagnostic Tests: An Implementation Guide. World Health Organization; Geneva, Switzerland: 2020.
    1. Lambert-Niclot S., Cuffel A., Le Pape S., Vauloup-Fellous C., Morand-Joubert L., Roque-Afonso A.-M., Le Goff J., Delaugerre C. Evaluation of a Rapid Diagnostic Assay for Detection of SARS-CoV-2 Antigen in Nasopharyngeal Swabs. J. Clin. Microbiol. 2020;58 doi: 10.1128/JCM.00977-20. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Lindner A.K., Nikolai O., Kausch F., Wintel M., Hommes F., Gertler M., Krüger L.J., Gaeddert M., Tobian F., Lainati F., et al. Head-to-head comparison of SARS-CoV-2 antigen-detecting rapid test with self-collected nasal swab versus professional-collected nasopharyngeal swab. Eur. Respir. J. 2021;57:2003961. doi: 10.1183/13993003.03961-2020. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Nagura-Ikeda M., Imai K., Tabata S., Miyoshi K., Murahara N., Mizuno T., Horiuchi M., Kato K., Imoto Y., Iwata M., et al. Clinical Evaluation of Self-Collected Saliva by Quantitative Reverse Transcription-PCR (RT-qPCR), Direct RT-qPCR, Reverse Transcription–Loop-Mediated Isothermal Amplification, and a Rapid Antigen Test To Diagnose COVID-19. J. Clin. Microbiol. 2020;58 doi: 10.1128/JCM.01438-20. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources