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 3;9(1):e0034221.
doi: 10.1128/Spectrum.00342-21. Epub 2021 Aug 4.

Evaluation of the INDICAID COVID-19 Rapid Antigen Test in Symptomatic Populations and Asymptomatic Community Testing

Affiliations

Evaluation of the INDICAID COVID-19 Rapid Antigen Test in Symptomatic Populations and Asymptomatic Community Testing

Ricky Y T Chiu et al. Microbiol Spectr. .

Abstract

As the COVID-19 pandemic progresses, there is an increasing need for rapid, accessible assays for SARS-CoV-2 detection. We present a clinical evaluation and real-world implementation of the INDICAID COVID-19 rapid antigen test (INDICAID rapid test). A multisite clinical evaluation of the INDICAID rapid test using prospectively collected nasal (bilateral anterior) swab samples from symptomatic subjects was performed. The INDICAID rapid test demonstrated a positive percent agreement (PPA) and negative percent agreement (NPA) of 85.3% (95% confidence interval [95% CI], 75.6% to 91.6%) and 94.9% (95% CI, 91.6% to 96.9%), respectively, compared to laboratory-based reverse transcriptase PCR (RT-PCR) using nasal specimens. The INDICAID rapid test was then implemented at COVID-19 outbreak screening centers in Hong Kong as part of a testing algorithm (termed "dual-track") to screen asymptomatic individuals for prioritization for confirmatory RT-PCR testing. In one approach, preliminary positive INDICAID rapid test results triggered expedited processing for laboratory-based RT-PCR, reducing the average time to confirmatory result from 10.85 h to 7.0 h. In a second approach, preliminary positive results triggered subsequent testing with an onsite rapid RT-PCR, reducing the average time to confirmatory result to 0.84 h. In 22,994 asymptomatic patients, the INDICAID rapid test demonstrated a PPA of 84.2% (95% CI, 69.6% to 92.6%) and an NPA of 99.9% (95% CI, 99.9% to 100%) compared to laboratory-based RT-PCR using combined nasal/oropharyngeal specimens. The INDICAID rapid test has excellent performance compared to laboratory-based RT-PCR testing and, when used in tandem with RT-PCR, reduces the time to confirmatory positive result. IMPORTANCE Laboratory-based RT-PCR, the current gold standard for COVID-19 testing, can require a turnaround time of 24 to 48 h from sample collection to result. The delayed time to result limits the effectiveness of centralized RT-PCR testing to reduce transmission and stem potential outbreaks. To address this, we conducted a thorough evaluation of the INDICAID COVID-19 rapid antigen test, a 20-minute rapid antigen test, in both symptomatic and asymptomatic populations. The INDICAID rapid test demonstrated high sensitivity and specificity with RT-PCR as the comparator method. A dual-track testing algorithm was also evaluated utilizing the INDICAID rapid test to screen for preliminary positive patients, whose samples were then prioritized for RT-PCR testing. The dual-track method demonstrated significant improvements in expediting the reporting of positive RT-PCR test results compared to standard RT-PCR testing without prioritization, offering an improved strategy for community testing and controlling SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks.

Keywords: COVID-19; Hong Kong; SARS-CoV-2; USA; antigen; asymptomatic screening; rapid.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

FIG 1
FIG 1
Association between CT value and INDICAID rapid test result when using (A) health care professional-collected samples and (B) self-collected samples for INDICAID rapid test.
FIG 2
FIG 2
Association between CT value and INDICAID rapid test results when implemented in outbreak screening centers.
FIG 3
FIG 3
Flow charts of dual-track testing algorithm approaches A and B.

References

    1. Baker RE, Park SW, Yang W, Vecchi GA, Jessica C, Grenfell BT. 2020. The impact of COVID-19 nonpharmaceutical interventions on the future dynamics of endemic infections. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 117:30547–30553. doi: 10.1073/pnas.2013182117. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Kretzschmar ME, Rozhnova G, Bootsma MCJ, van Boven M, van de Wijgert JHHM, Bonten MJM. 2020. Impact of delays on effectiveness of contact tracing strategies for COVID-19: a modelling study. Lancet Public Health 5:e452–e459. doi: 10.1016/S2468-2667(20)30157-2. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. FDA. 2020. Policy for coronavirus disease-2019 tests during the public health emergency (revised): immediately in effect guidance for clinical laboratories, commercial manufacturers, and food and drug administration staff.
    1. Valasek MA, Repa JJ. 2005. The power of real-time PCR. Adv Physiol Educ 29:151–159. doi: 10.1152/advan.00019.2005. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Petersen E, Koopmans M, Go U, Hamer DH, Petrosillo N, Castelli F, Storgaard M, Al Khalili S, Simonsen L. 2020. Comparing SARS-CoV-2 with SARS-CoV and influenza pandemics. Lancet Infect Dis 20:e238–e244. doi: 10.1016/S1473-3099(20)30484-9. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms

Substances