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 Nov 15;11(11):2110.
doi: 10.3390/diagnostics11112110.

Diagnostic Performance of Automated SARS-CoV-2 Antigen Assay in Nasal Swab during COVID-19 Vaccination Campaign

Haya Altawalah  1   2 , Wadha Alfouzan  1   3 , Talal Al-Fadalah  4 , Sayeh Ezzikouri  5
Affiliations

Diagnostic Performance of Automated SARS-CoV-2 Antigen Assay in Nasal Swab during COVID-19 Vaccination Campaign

Haya Altawalah et al. Diagnostics (Basel). .

Abstract

Background: To control the spread of the pandemic brought about by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection, it is necessary to have an automated reliable diagnostic assay. To date, the RT-PCR (RT-qPCR) has been the recommended laboratory method to diagnose SARS-CoV-2 infection, but there is a need for more automated and reliable tests. The aim of this real-life study was to assess the diagnostic performance of DiaSorin's LIAISON SARS-CoV-2 antigen (Ag) chemiluminescence immunoassay in detecting SARS-CoV-2 in vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals.

Methods: A prospective study was performed on 300 nasopharyngeal swabs randomly collected from 31 May to 6 July 2021. Nasopharyngeal samples were assayed with DiaSorin's LIAISON SARS-CoV-2 Ag and TaqPath™ COVID-19 multiplex RT-qPCR.

Results: Of 300 participants, 150 had a RT-qPCR confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection of whom 113 (75.33%) were also detected by the DiaSorin LIAISON SARS-CoV-2 Ag. Taking RT-qPCR as a reference, the sensitivity and specificity of the DiaSorin LIAISON SARS-CoV-2 Ag assay were evaluated as 75.33% (95% CI = 67.64-82) and 100% (95% CI = 97.57-100), respectively. When a viral load cut-off was applied for high viral load (median cycle threshold (Ct) < 18.57), the overall sensitivity was increased to 96.55% (95% CI = 88.09-99.58). Interestingly, median RT-qPCR Ct and SARS-CoV-2 Ag values were similar between fully vaccinated and unvaccinated subjects.

Conclusions: Automated, quantitative LIAISON SARS-CoV-2 Ag assay shows good performance to identify SARS-CoV-2-infected individuals with moderate to high viral loads. LIAISON SARS-CoV-2 Ag testing could be used as frontline testing for COVID-19 diagnosis and be more suitable for large utilization.

Keywords: Ag-RDT; COVID-19; SARS-CoV2; diagnosis; rapid decisions.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
SARS-CoV-2 antigen detection according to RT-qPCR results. (a) The level of SARS-CoV-2 Ag among the RT-qPCR positive and negative samples. (b) Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis to evaluate the diagnostic value of the LIAISON SARS-CoV-2 Ag assay. Data are presented as mean ± SD.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Linear regression of RT-qPCR Ct values versus the level of antigen (log10 transformed TCID50/mL results) obtained on the DiaSorin LIAISON SARS-CoV-2 Ag assay.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Cycle threshold (Ct) values for PCR-positive infections by vaccination status and type of vaccine. (a) Data are presented as RT-qPCR Ct values. (b) Data are presented as SARS-CoV-2 antigen levels obtained on the DiaSorin LIAISON SARS-CoV-2 Ag assay. Data are presented as median with range.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Kucharski A.J., Klepac P., Conlan A.J.K., Kissler S.M., Tang M.L., Fry H., Gog J.R., Edmunds W.J., Emery J.C., Medley G., et al. Effectiveness of isolation, testing, contact tracing, and physical distancing on reducing transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in different settings: A mathematical modelling study. Lancet Infect. Dis. 2020;20:1151–1160. doi: 10.1016/S1473-3099(20)30457-6. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Phua J., Weng L., Ling L., Egi M., Lim C.M., Divatia J.V., Shrestha B.R., Arabi Y.M., Ng J., Gomersall C.D., et al. Intensive care management of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19): Challenges and recommendations. Lancet Respir. Med. 2020;8:506–517. doi: 10.1016/S2213-2600(20)30161-2. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Kevadiya B.D., Machhi J., Herskovitz J., Oleynikov M.D., Blomberg W.R., Bajwa N., Soni D., Das S., Hasan M., Patel M., et al. Diagnostics for SARS-CoV-2 infections. Nat. Mater. 2021;20:593–605. doi: 10.1038/s41563-020-00906-z. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Ezzikouri S., Nourlil J., Benjelloun S., Kohara M., Tsukiyama-Kohara K. Coronavirus disease 2019-Historical context, virology, pathogenesis, immunotherapy, and vaccine development. Hum. Vaccin Immunother. 2020;16:2992–3000. doi: 10.1080/21645515.2020.1787068. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Lefever S., Indevuyst C., Cuypers L., Dewaele K., Yin N., Cotton F., Padalko E., Oyaert M., Descy J., Cavalier E., et al. Comparison of the Quantitative DiaSorin Liaison Antigen Test to Reverse Transcription-PCR for the Diagnosis of COVID-19 in Symptomatic and Asymptomatic Outpatients. J. Clin. Microbiol. 2021;59:e0037421. doi: 10.1128/JCM.00374-21. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources