Antigen-Based Point of Care Testing (POCT) for Diagnosing SARS-CoV-2: Assessing Performance
- PMID: 35554900
- DOI: 10.1007/978-1-0716-2111-0_4
Antigen-Based Point of Care Testing (POCT) for Diagnosing SARS-CoV-2: Assessing Performance
Abstract
Currently, the most accurate way to diagnose an active SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) infection is through detection of viral RNA using reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) test. While RT-PCR tests are the most sensitive for identifying infection, there are significant limitations, such as global access to sufficient test kits, turnaround times (TAT) from specimen collection to test result is often greater than 24 h and the need for skilled operators in accredited laboratories requiring specialized equipment. A rapid test performed at the point of care (POC) could provide a result within an approximate time of 30 min post specimen collection, be performed by a health care worker and comprise a simple workflow, improving both turnaround time and potentially decreasing costs (e.g., transport, cold-chain, skilled laboratory staff, complex equipment). Determining the performance of SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR tests is, however, easier to assess than antigen-based POCT, as residual clinical specimens (swabs in universal transport media [UTM]) are readily available in laboratory environments, and do not require patient informed consent. Evaluating the performance of POCT requires informed-consent driven studies, with patients required to provide a standard of care specimen as well as study evaluation specimens, which is often not acceptable as nasopharyngeal swabbing can be invasive, clinical field trials are costly and time consuming. Many institutions and regulatory bodies also require preliminary data prior to use in field settings. Therefore, we have developed a method to determine the performance of antigen based POCT that can be used by implementers in national healthcare programs, regulators and rapid test developers. The method investigates both quantitative and qualitative parameters, with the latter providing insights into the capability for implementation and national program uptake.
Keywords: Implementation readiness; Lateral flow assay; Nucleocapsid protein; Performance; Regulation; SARS-CoV-2 diagnostics; SARS-CoV-2 point of care; SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen test.
© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.
Similar articles
-
One Swab Fits All: Performance of a Rapid, Antigen-Based SARS-CoV-2 Test Using a Nasal Swab, Nasopharyngeal Swab for Nasal Collection, and RT-PCR Confirmation from Residual Extraction Buffer.J Appl Lab Med. 2022 Jun 30;7(4):834-841. doi: 10.1093/jalm/jfac004. J Appl Lab Med. 2022. PMID: 35258088 Free PMC article.
-
Panbio antigen rapid test is reliable to diagnose SARS-CoV-2 infection in the first 7 days after the onset of symptoms.J Clin Virol. 2020 Dec;133:104659. doi: 10.1016/j.jcv.2020.104659. Epub 2020 Oct 16. J Clin Virol. 2020. PMID: 33160179 Free PMC article.
-
Comparison between Nasal and Nasopharyngeal Swabs for SARS-CoV-2 Rapid Antigen Detection in an Asymptomatic Population, and Direct Confirmation by RT-PCR from the Residual Buffer.Microbiol Spectr. 2022 Feb 23;10(1):e0245521. doi: 10.1128/spectrum.02455-21. Epub 2022 Feb 16. Microbiol Spectr. 2022. PMID: 35171010 Free PMC article.
-
Point of care molecular and antigen detection tests for COVID-19: current status and future prospects.Expert Rev Mol Diagn. 2022 Aug;22(8):797-809. doi: 10.1080/14737159.2022.2122712. Epub 2022 Sep 14. Expert Rev Mol Diagn. 2022. PMID: 36093682 Review.
-
Development of Integrated Systems for On-Site Infection Detection.Acc Chem Res. 2021 Nov 2;54(21):3991-4000. doi: 10.1021/acs.accounts.1c00498. Epub 2021 Oct 22. Acc Chem Res. 2021. PMID: 34677927 Free PMC article. Review.
Cited by
-
Advancements in nanobiosensor technologies for in-vitro diagnostics to point of care testing.Heliyon. 2024 Nov 9;10(22):e40306. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e40306. eCollection 2024 Nov 30. Heliyon. 2024. PMID: 39624329 Free PMC article. Review.
References
-
- Zhu N, Zhang D, Wang W, Li X, Yang B, Song J, Zhao X, Huang B, Shi W, Lu R, Niu P, Zhan F, Ma X, Wang D, Xu W, Wu G, Gao GF, Tan W, China Novel Coronavirus I, Research T (2020) A novel coronavirus from patients with pneumonia in China, 2019. N Engl J Med 382(8):727–733. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa2001017 - DOI - PubMed - PMC
-
- Wang C, Wang Z, Wang G, Lau JY, Zhang K, Li W (2021) COVID-19 in early 2021: current status and looking forward. Signal Transduct Target Ther 6(1):114. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41392-021-00527-1 - DOI - PubMed - PMC
-
- Sethuraman N, Jeremiah SS, Ryo A (2020) Interpreting diagnostic tests for SARS-CoV-2. JAMA 323(22):2249–2251 - DOI
-
- Tahamtan A, Ardebili A (2020) Real-time RT-PCR in COVID-19 detection: issues affecting the results. Expert Rev Mol Diagn 20(5):453–454. https://doi.org/10.1080/14737159.2020.1757437 - DOI - PubMed
-
- Corman VM, Landt O, Kaiser M, Molenkamp R, Meijer A, Chu DK, Bleicker T, Brunink S, Schneider J, Schmidt ML, Mulders DG, Haagmans BL, van der Veer B, van den Brink S, Wijsman L, Goderski G, Romette JL, Ellis J, Zambon M, Peiris M, Goossens H, Reusken C, Koopmans MP, Drosten C (2020) Detection of 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) by real-time RT-PCR. Euro Surveill 25(3). https://doi.org/10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2020.25.3.2000045
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
Miscellaneous