Testing for SARS-CoV-2 in resource-limited settings: A cost analysis study of diagnostic tests using different Ag-RDTs and RT-PCR technologies in Mozambique.

Early diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 is fundamental to reduce the risk of community transmission and mortality, as well as public sector expenditures. Three years after the onset of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, there are still gaps on what is known regarding costs and cost drivers for the major diagnostic testing strategies in low- middle-income countries (LMICs). This study aimed to estimate the cost of SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis of symptomatic suspected patients by reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) and antigen rapid diagnostic tests (Ag-RDT) in Mozambique. We conducted a retrospective cost analysis from the provider's perspective using a bottom-up, micro-costing approach, and compared the direct costs of two nasopharyngeal Ag-RDTs (Panbio and Standard Q) against the costs of three nasal Ag-RDTs (Panbio, COVIOS and LumiraDx), and RT-PCR. The study was undertaken from November 2020 to December 2021 in the country's capital city Maputo, in four healthcare facilities at primary, secondary and tertiary levels of care, and at one reference laboratory. All the resources necessary for RT-PCR and Ag-RDT tests were identified, quantified, valued, and the unit costs per test and per facility were estimated. Our findings show that the mean unit cost of SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis by nasopharyngeal Ag-RDTs was MZN 728.00 (USD 11.90, at 2020 exchange rates) for Panbio and MZN 728.00 (USD 11.90) for Standard Q. For diagnosis by nasal Ag-RDTs, Panbio was MZN 547.00 (USD 8.90), COVIOS was MZN 768.00 (USD 12.50), and LumiraDx was MZN 798.00 (USD 13.00). Medical supplies expenditures represented the main driver of the final cost (>50%), followed by personnel and overhead costs (mean 15% for each). The mean unit cost regardless of the type of Ag-RDT was MZN 714.00 (USD 11.60). Diagnosis by RT-PCR cost MZN 2,414 (USD 39.00) per test. Our sensitivity analysis suggests that focussing on reducing medical supplies costs would be the most cost-saving strategy for governments in LMICs, particularly as international prices decrease. The cost of SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis using Ag-RDTs was three times lower than RT-PCR testing. Governments in LMICs can include cost-efficient Ag-RDTs in their screening strategies, or RT-PCR if international costs of such supplies decrease further in the future. Additional analyses are recommended as the costs of testing can be influenced by the sample referral system.

Nucleic Acid Point-of-Care Testing to Improve Diagnostic Preparedness.

Testing programs for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 have relied on high-throughput polymerase chain reaction laboratory tests and rapid antigen assays to meet diagnostic needs. Both technologies are essential; however, issues of cost, accessibility, manufacturing delays, and performance have limited their use in low-resource settings and contributed to the global inequity in coronavirus disease 2019 testing. Emerging low-cost, multidisease point-of-care nucleic acid tests may address these limitations and strengthen pandemic preparedness, especially within primary healthcare where most cases of disease first present. Widespread deployment of these novel technologies will also help close long-standing test access gaps for other diseases, including tuberculosis, human immunodeficiency virus, cervical cancer, viral hepatitis, and sexually transmitted infections. We propose a more optimized testing framework based on greater use of point-of-care nucleic acid tests together with rapid immunologic assays and high-throughput laboratory molecular tests to improve the diagnosis of priority endemic and epidemic diseases, as well as strengthen the overall delivery of primary healthcare services.

Genomic epidemiology of SARS-CoV-2 during the first four waves in Mozambique

Mozambique reported the first case of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in March 2020 and it has since spread to all provinces in the country. To investigate the introductions and spread of SARS-CoV-2 in Mozambique, 1 142 whole genome sequences sampled within Mozambique were phylogenetically analyzed against a globally representative set, reflecting the first 25 months of the epidemic. The epidemic in the country was marked by four waves of infection, the first associated with B.1 ancestral lineages, while the Beta, Delta, and Omicron Variants of Concern (VOCs) were responsible for most infections and deaths during the second, third, and fourth waves. Large-scale viral exchanges occurred during the latter three waves and were largely attributed to southern African origins. Not only did the country remain vulnerable to the introductions of new variants but these variants continued to evolve within the borders of the country. Due to the Mozambican health system already under constraint, and paucity of data in Mozambique, there is a need to continue to strengthen and support genomic surveillance in the country as VOCs and Variants of interests (VOIs) are often reported from the southern African region.

The clinical effect of point-of-care HIV diagnosis in infants: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Timely diagnosis and treatment of HIV is crucial in HIV-exposed infants to prevent the high rates of mortality seen during the first 2 years of life if HIV is untreated. However, challenges with sample transportation, testing, and result delivery to caregivers have led to long delays in treatment initiation. We aimed to compare the clinical effect of point-of-care HIV testing versus laboratory-based testing (standard of care) in HIV-exposed infants. METHODS: We did a systematic review and meta-analysis and searched PubMed, MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Embase, Conference Proceedings Citation Index-Science, and WHO Global Index Medicus, from Jan 1, 2014, to Aug 31, 2020. Studies were included if they pertained to the use of point-of-care nucleic acid testing for infant HIV diagnosis, had a laboratory-based nucleic acid test as the comparator or standard of care against the index test (same-day point-of-care testing), evaluated clinical outcomes when point-of-care testing was used, and included HIV-exposed infants aged younger than 2 years. Studies were excluded if they did not use a laboratory-based comparator, a nucleic acid test that had been approved by a stringent regulatory authority, or diagnostic-accuracy or performance evaluations (eg, no clinical outcomes included). Reviews, non-research letters, commentaries, and editorials were also excluded. The risk of bias was evaluated using the ROBINS-I framework. Data were extracted from published reports. Data from all studies were analysed using frequency statistics to describe the overall populations evaluated and their results. Key outcomes were time to result delivery and antiretroviral therapy initiation, and proportion of HIV-positive infants initiated on antiretroviral therapy within 60 days after sample collection. FINDINGS: 164 studies were identified by the search and seven were included in the analysis, comprising 37 377 infants in total across 15 countries, including 25 170 (67%) who had point-of-care HIV testing and 12 207 (33%) who had standard-of-care testing. The certainty of evidence was high. Same-day point-of-care testing led to a significantly shorter time between sample collection and result delivery to caregivers compared with standard-of-care testing (median 0 days [95% CI 0-0] vs 35 days [35-37]). Time from sample collection to antiretroviral therapy initiation in infants found to be HIV-positive was significantly lower with point-of-care testing compared with standard of care (median 0 days [95% CI 0-1] vs 40 days [36-44]). When each study's result was weighted equally, 90·3% (95% CI 76·7-96·5) of HIV-positive infants diagnosed using point-of-care testing had started antiretroviral therapy within 60 days of sample collection, compared with only 51·6% (27·1-75·7) who had standard-of-care testing (odds ratio 8·74 [95% CI 6·6-11·6]; p<0·0001). INTERPRETATION: Overall, the certainty of the evidence in this analysis was rated as high for the primary outcomes related to result delivery and treatment initiation, with no serious risk of bias, inconsistency, indirectness, or imprecision. In HIV-exposed infants, same-day point-of-care HIV testing was associated with significantly improved time to result delivery, time to antiretroviral therapy initiation, and proportion of HIV-positive infants starting antiretroviral therapy within 60 days compared with standard of care. FUNDING: The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

Prevalence of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) Antibodies in the Mozambican Population: A Cross-Sectional Serologic Study in 3 Cities, July-August 2020.

BACKGROUND: The extent of population exposure to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) was uncertain in many African countries during the onset of the pandemic. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional study and randomly selected and surveyed general population and occupational groups from 6 July to 24 August 2020, in 3 cities in Mozambique. Anti-SARS-CoV-2-specific immunoglobulin M (IgM) and immunoglobulin G (IgG) antibodies were measured using a point-of-care rapid test. The prevalence was weighted for population (by age, sex, and city) and adjusted for test sensitivity and specificity. RESULTS: A total of 21 183 participants, including 11 143 from the general population and 10 040 from occupational groups, were included across all 3 cities. General population seropositivity (IgM or IgG) prevalence was 3.0% (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.0%-6.6%) in Pemba, 2.1% (95% CI, 1.2%-3.3%) in Maputo City, and 0.9% (95% CI, .1%-1.9%) in Quelimane. The prevalence in occupational groups ranged from 2.8% (95% CI, 1.3%-5.2%) to 5.9% (95% CI, 4.3%-8.0%) in Pemba, 0.3% (95% CI, .0%-2.2%) to 4.0% (95% CI, 2.6%-5.7%) in Maputo City, and 0.0% (95% CI, .0%-.7%) to 6.6% (95% CI, 3.8%-10.5%) in Quelimane, and showed variations between the groups tested. CONCLUSIONS: In the first representative COVID-19 serosurveys in Mozambique, in mid-2020, weighted and assay-adjusted seroprevalence in 3 provincial capitals of anti-SARS-CoV-2 ranged from 0.9% to 3.0%, whereas adjusted prevalence in occupational groups ranged from 0.0% to 6.6% with variation between groups. Exposure to SARS-CoV-2 was extensive during the first pandemic wave, and transmission may have been more intense among occupational groups. These data have been of utmost importance to inform public health intervention to control and respond to the pandemic in Mozambique.

Clinical Performance of Self-Collected Nasal Swabs and Antigen Rapid Tests for SARS-CoV-2 Detection in Resource-Poor Settings.

Background: In resource-poor countries, antigen-based rapid tests (Ag-RDTs) performed at primary healthcare and community settings improved access to SARS-CoV-2 diagnostics. However, the technical skills and biosafety requirements inherent to nasopharyngeal and oropharyngeal (OP) specimens limit the scale-up of SARS-CoV-2 testing. The collection of nasal-swabs is programmatically viable, but its performance has not been evaluated in resource-poor settings. Methods: We first evaluated the performance of SteriPack self-collected nasal swabs for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 by real-time PCR in 1498 consecutively enrolled patients with suspected infection. Next, we evaluated the clinical performance of three nasal swab-based Ag-RDTs against real-time PCR on OP specimens. Results: The sensitivity of nasal swabs was 80.6% [95% CI: 75.3-85.2%] compared to OP specimens. There was a good correlation (r = 0.58; p < 0.0001) between Ct values of 213 positive cases obtained using nasal and OP swabs. Our findings show sensitivities of 79.7% [95% CI: 73.3-85.1%] for Panbio COVID-19 Ag-RDT, 59.6% [95% CI: 55.2-63.8%] for COVIOS Ag-RDT, and 78.0% [95% CI: 73.5-82.0%] for the LumiraDx SARS-CoV-2 Ag-RDT. Conclusions: In our setting, the COVIOS Ag-RDT did not meet WHO requirements. Nasal swab-based Ag-RDTs for SARS-CoV-2 detection constitute a viable and accurate diagnostic option in resource-poor settings.

Qualitative evaluation of enabling factors and barriers to the success and sustainability of national public health institutes in Cambodia, Colombia, Liberia, Mozambique, Nigeria, Rwanda and Zambia.

OBJECTIVES: The success of National Public Health Institutes (NPHIs) in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) is critical to countries' ability to deliver public health services to their populations and effectively respond to public health emergencies. However, empirical data are limited on factors that promote or are barriers to the sustainability of NPHIs. This evaluation explored stakeholders' perceptions about enabling factors and barriers to the success and sustainability of NPHIs in seven countries where the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has supported NPHI development and strengthening. DESIGN: Qualitative study. SETTING: Cambodia, Colombia, Liberia, Mozambique, Nigeria, Rwanda and Zambia. PARTICIPANTS: NPHI staff, non-NPHI government staff, and non-governmental and international organisation staff. METHODS: We conducted semistructured, in-person interviews at a location chosen by the participants in the seven countries. We analysed data using a directed content analysis approach. RESULTS: We interviewed 43 NPHI staff, 29 non-NPHI government staff and 24 staff from non-governmental and international organisations. Participants identified five enabling factors critical to the success and sustainability of NPHIs: (1) strong leadership, (2) financial autonomy, (3) political commitment and country ownership, (4) strengthening capacity of NPHI staff and (5) forming strategic partnerships. Three themes emerged related to major barriers or threats to the sustainability of NPHIs: (1) reliance on partner funding to maintain key activities, (2) changes in NPHI leadership and (3) staff attrition and turnover. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings contribute to the scant literature on sustainability of NPHIs in LMICs by identifying essential components of sustainability and types of support needed from various stakeholders. Integrating these components into each step of NPHI development and ensuring sufficient support will be critical to strengthening public health systems and safeguarding their continuity. Our findings offer potential approaches for country leadership to direct efforts to strengthen and sustain NPHIs.

Performance Evaluation of the STANDARDTM Q COVID-19 and PanbioTM COVID-19 Antigen Tests in Detecting SARS-CoV-2 during High Transmission Period in Mozambique.

(1) Background: Laboratory-based molecular assays are the gold standard to detect SARS-CoV-2. In resource-limited settings, the implementation of these assays has been hampered by operational challenges and long turnaround times. Rapid antigen detection tests are an attractive alternative. Our aim is to evaluate the clinical performance of two SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen tests during a high transmission period. (2) Methods: A total of 1277 patients seeking SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis were enrolled at four health facilities. Nasopharyngeal swabs for rapid antigen and real time PCR testing were collected for each patient. Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, misclassification rate, and agreement were determined. (3) Results: The overall sensitivity of Panbio COVID-19 was 41.3% (95% CI: 34.6-48.4%) and the specificity was 98.2% (95% CI: 96.2-99.3%). The Standard Q had an overall sensitivity and specificity of 45.0% (95% CI: 39.9-50.2%) and 97.6% (95% CI: 95.3-99.0%), respectively. The positive predictive value of a positive test was 93.3% and 95.4% for the Panbio and Standard Q Ag-RDTs, respectively. A higher sensitivity of 43.2% and 49.4% was observed in symptomatic cases for the Panbio and Standard Q Ag-RDTs, respectively. (4) Conclusions: Despite the overall low sensitivity, the two evaluated rapid tests are useful to improve the diagnosis of symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infections during high transmission periods.

African National Public Health Institutes Responses to COVID-19: Innovations, Systems Changes, and Challenges.

National public health institutes (NPHIs)-science-based governmental agencies typically part of, or closely aligned with, ministries of health-have played a critical part in many countries' responses to the COVID-19 pandemic. Through listening sessions with NPHI leadership, we captured the experiences of NPHIs in Africa. Our research was further supplemented by a review of the literature. To address issues related to COVID-19, NPHIs in Africa developed a variety of innovative approaches, such as working with the private sector to procure and manage vital supplies and address key information needs. Creative uses of technology, including virtual training and messaging from drones, contributed to sharing information and battling misinformation. Positive impacts of the pandemic response include increased laboratory capacity in many countries, modernized surveillance systems, and strengthened public-private partnerships; much of this enhanced capacity is expected to persist beyond the pandemic. However, several challenges remain, including the lack of staff trained in areas like bioinformatics (essential for genomic analysis) and the need for sustained relationships and data sharing between NPHIs and agencies not traditionally considered public health (eg, those related to border crossings), as well as the impact of the pandemic on prevention and control of non-COVID-19 conditions-both infectious and noncommunicable. Participants in the listening sessions also highlighted concerns about inequities in access to, and quality of, the public health services and clinical care with resultant disproportionate impact of the pandemic on certain populations. COVID-19 responses and challenges highlight the need for continued investment to strengthen NPHIs and public health infrastructure to address longstanding deficiencies and ensure preparedness for the next public health crisis.