Evaluation of the performance of 25 SARS-CoV-2 serological rapid diagnostic tests using a reference panel of plasma specimens at the Uganda Virus Research Institute.

INTRODUCTION: Serological testing is needed to better understand the epidemiology of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) virus. Rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) have been developed to detect specific antibodies, IgM and IgG, to the virus. The performance of 25 of these RDTs was evaluated. METHODS: A serological reference panel of 50 positive and 100 negative plasma specimens was developed from SARS-CoV-2 PCR and antibody positive patients and pre-pandemic SARS-CoV-2-negative specimens collected in 2016. Test performance of the 25 RDTs was evaluated against this panel. RESULTS: A total of 10 RDTs had a sensitivity ≥98%, while 13 RDTs had a specificity ≥98% to anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies. Four RDTs (Boson, MultiG, Standard Q, and VivaDiag) had both sensitivity and specificity ≥98% to anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies. Only three RDTs had a sensitivity ≥98%, while 10 RDTs had a specificity ≥98% to anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgM antibodies. Three RDTs (Autobio, MultiG, and Standard Q) had sensitivity and specificity ≥98% to combined IgG/IgM. The RDTs that performed well also had perfect or almost perfect inter-reader agreement. CONCLUSIONS: This evaluation identified three RDTs with a sensitivity and specificity to IgM/IgG antibodies of ≥98% with the potential for widespread antibody testing in Uganda.

Differential Performance of CoronaCHEK SARS-CoV-2 Lateral Flow Antibody Assay by Geographic Origin of Samples.

We assessed the performance of the CoronaCHEK lateral flow assay on samples from Uganda and Baltimore to determine the impact of geographic origin on assay performance. Plasma samples from severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) PCR-positive individuals (Uganda, 78 samples from 78 individuals, and Baltimore, 266 samples from 38 individuals) and from prepandemic individuals (Uganda, 1,077, and Baltimore, 532) were evaluated. Prevalence ratios (PR) were calculated to identify factors associated with a false-positive test. After the first positive PCR in Ugandan samples, the sensitivity was 45% (95% confidence interval [CI], 24,68) at 0 to 7 days, 79% (95% CI, 64 to 91) at 8 to 14 days, and 76% (95% CI, 50 to 93) at >15 days. In samples from Baltimore, sensitivity was 39% (95% CI, 30 to 49) at 0 to 7 days, 86% (95% CI, 79 to 92) at 8 to 14 days, and 100% (95% CI, 89 to 100) at 15 days after positive PCR. The specificity of 96.5% (95% CI, 97.5 to 95.2) in Ugandan samples was significantly lower than that in samples from Baltimore, 99.3% (95% CI, 98.1 to 99.8; P < 0.01). In Ugandan samples, individuals with a false-positive result were more likely to be male (PR, 2.04; 95% CI, 1.03,3.69) or individuals who had had a fever more than a month prior to sample acquisition (PR, 2.87; 95% CI, 1.12 to 7.35). Sensitivity of the CoronaCHEK was similar in samples from Uganda and Baltimore. The specificity was significantly lower in Ugandan samples than in Baltimore samples. False-positive results in Ugandan samples appear to correlate with a recent history of a febrile illness, potentially indicative of a cross-reactive immune response in individuals from East Africa.

Field evaluation of the performance of a SARS-CoV-2 antigen rapid diagnostic test in Uganda using nasopharyngeal samples.

OBJECTIVES: There is a high demand for SARS-CoV-2 testing to identify COVID-19 cases. Real-time quantitative PCR (qRT-PCR) is the recommended diagnostic test but a number of constraints prevent its widespread implementation, including cost. The aim of this study was to evaluate a low cost and easy to use rapid antigen test for diagnosing COVID-19 at the point of care. METHODS: Nasopharyngeal swabs from suspected COVID-19 cases and low-risk volunteers were tested with the STANDARD Q COVID-19 Ag Test and the results were compared with the qRT-PCR results. RESULTS: In total, 262 samples were collected, including 90 qRT-PCR positives. The majority of samples were from males (89%) with a mean age of 34 years and only 13 (14%) of the positives were mildly symptomatic. The sensitivity and specificity of the antigen test were 70.0% (95% confidence interval (CI): 60-79) and 92% (95% CI: 87-96), respectively, and the diagnostic accuracy was 84% (95% CI: 79-88). The antigen test was more likely to be positive for samples with qRT-PCR Ct values ≤29, with a sensitivity of 92%. CONCLUSIONS: The STANDARD Q COVID-19 Ag Test performed less than optimally in this evaluation. However, the test may still have an important role to play early in infection when timely access to molecular testing is not available but the results should be confirmed by qRT-PCR.