A SARS-CoV-2 Nucleocapsid Variant that Affects Antigen Test Performance (preprint)

More than one year into a global pandemic, SARS-CoV-2 is now defined by a variety of rapidly evolving variant lineages. Several FDA authorized molecular diagnostic tests have been impacted by viral variation, while no reports of viral variation affecting antigen test performance have occurred to date. While determining the analytical sensitivity of the Quidel Sofia SARS Antigen FIA test (Sofia 2), we uncovered a high viral load specimen that repeatedly tested negative by this antigen test. Whole genome sequencing of the specimen uncovered two mutations, T205I and D399N, present in the nucleocapsid protein of the isolate. All six SARS-CoV-2 positive clinical specimens available in our laboratory with a D399N nucleocapsid mutation and CT < 31 were not detected by the Sofia 2 but detected by the Abbott BinaxNOW COVID-19 Ag Card, while clinical specimens with the T205I mutation were detected by both assays. Testing of recombinant SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid with these variants demonstrated an approximate 1000-fold loss in sensitivity for the Quidel Sofia SARS Antigen FIA test associated with the D399N mutation, while the BinaxNOW and Quidel Quickvue SARS Antigen tests were unaffected by the mutation. The D399N nucleocapsid mutation has been relatively uncommon to date, appearing in only 0.02% of genomes worldwide at time of writing. Our results demonstrate how routine pathogen genomics can be integrated into the clinical microbiology laboratory to investigate diagnostic edge cases, as well as the importance of profiling antigenic diversity outside of the spike protein for SARS-CoV-2 diagnostics.

Estimating the false positive rate of highly automated SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid amplification testing (preprint)

Molecular testing for infectious diseases is generally both very sensitive and specific. Well-designed PCR primers rarely cross-react with other analytes, and specificities seen during test validation are often 100%. However, analytical specificities measured during validation may not reflect real-world performance across the entire testing process. Here, we use the unique environment of SARS-CoV-2 screening among otherwise well individuals to examine the false positivity rate of high throughput so-called "sample-to-answer" nucleic acid amplification testing (NAAT) on three commercial assays: the Hologic Panther Fusion(R), Hologic Aptima(R) transcription mediated amplification (TMA), and Roche cobas(R) 6800. We used repetitive sampling of the same person as the gold standard to determine test specificity rather than retesting of the same sample. We examined 451 people repetitively sampled over 7 months via nasal swab, comprising 7,242 results. During the study period there were twelve positive tests (0.17%) from 9 people. Eight positive tests (0.11%, five individuals) were considered bona fide true positives based on repeat positives or outside testing and epidemiological data. One positive test had no follow-up testing or metadata and could not be adjudicated. Three positive tests (three individuals) did not repeat as positive on a subsequent collection, nor did the original positive specimen test positive on an orthogonal platform. We consider these three tests false positives and estimate the overall false positive rate of high-throughput automated, sample-to-answer NAAT testing to be approximately 0.041% (3/7242). These data help laboratorians, epidemiologists, and regulators understand specificity and positive predictive value associated with high-throughput NAAT testing.