ABSTRACT
During the second year of the COVID-19 pandemic, the use of Rapid Diagnosis Antigen Tests (RDAgTs) for SARS-CoV-2 detection has substantially increased as some of the brands available in the market were certified for clinical use by international regulatory agencies. RDAgTs are a fast and cheap tool for SARS-CoV-2 surveillance with great potential to improve testing capacities in middle- and low-income countries compared to the gold standard RT-qPCR. However, as the clinical performance of RDAgTs has been shown to vary greatly between the commercial brands available, evaluation studies are necessary. Moreover, the available evaluation has been done in high-income countries while SARS-CoV-2 transmission is also actively happening in developing countries, many of which are located in tropical latitudes where cross-reactivity with other infectious agents is highly prevalent, which could compromise RDAgT specificity. Moreover, unreported mutations and/or new SARS-CoV-2 variants may compromise RDAgT sensitivity as genomic surveillance is limited in these settings. Here we describe a multicenter and manufacturer-independent evaluation of the clinical performance and analytical sensitivity of three different RDAgTs brands available in South America from three companies, Rapigen (South Korea), SD-Biosensor (South Korea), and Certest (Spain), compared to the gold standard RT-qPCR. A total number of 1,646 nasopharyngeal swabs from community-dwelling individuals were included in the study, and 379 of them were SARS-CoV-2 positive by RT-qPCR. The overall sensitivity for each RDAgT was 79% (IC95%: 72 - 86.2), 64.2% (IC95%: 56.7 - 71.6), and 45.8% (IC95%: 35.8 - 55.8) for SD-Biosensor, Certest, and Rapigen, respectively. The overall specificity for each RDAgT was 100%, 97.7% (IC95%: 96.8 - 98.6), and 100% for SD-Biosensor, Certest, and Rapigen, respectively. However, the limit of detection (LoD) to achieve a sensitivity over 90% was substantially lower for Certest RDAgT (102 copies/uL) compared to SD-Biosensor (103 copies/uL) or Rapigen (106 copies/uL) RDAgTs, considering that the gold standard RT-qPCR method used in this study has a high sensitivity of 97.7% and low LoD of 5 copies/uL. Additionally, the Certest RDAgT also showed an improved sensitivity up to 79.7% (IC95%: 70.2 - 89.2) for symptomatic individuals. Finally, the slight reduction in specificity for Certest RDAgTs was only associated with one of the laboratories performing this study, pointing out the need for locally assessed evaluation for RDAgTs like this one carried out in Ecuador. In conclusion, two of the three the RDAgTs tested in this study are a fast, cheap, and point of care tool for SARS-CoV-2 surveillance and reliable enough to detect SARS-CoV-2 infectious individuals.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , COVID-19/diagnosis , Humans , Independent Living , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , Sensitivity and SpecificityABSTRACT
During the second year of the COVID-19 pandemic, the use of Rapid Diagnosis Antigen Tests (RDAgTs) for SARS-CoV-2 detection has substantially increased as some of the brands available in the market were certified for clinical use by international regulatory agencies. RDAgTs are a fast and cheap tool for SARS-CoV-2 surveillance with great potential to improve testing capacities in middle- and low-income countries compared to the gold standard RT-qPCR. However, as the clinical performance of RDAgTs has been shown to vary greatly between the commercial brands available, evaluation studies are necessary. Moreover, the available evaluation has been done in high-income countries while SARS-CoV-2 transmission is also actively happening in developing countries, many of which are located in tropical latitudes where cross-reactivity with other infectious agents is highly prevalent, which could compromise RDAgT specificity. Moreover, unreported mutations and/or new SARS-CoV-2 variants may compromise RDAgT sensitivity as genomic surveillance is limited in these settings. Here we describe a multicenter and manufacturer‐independent evaluation of the clinical performance and analytical sensitivity of three different RDAgTs brands available in South America from three companies, Rapigen (South Korea), SD-Biosensor (South Korea), and Certest (Spain), compared to the gold standard RT-qPCR. A total number of 1,646 nasopharyngeal swabs from community-dwelling individuals were included in the study, and 379 of them were SARS-CoV-2 positive by RT-qPCR. The overall sensitivity for each RDAgT was 79% (IC95%: 72 - 86.2), 64.2% (IC95%: 56.7 - 71.6), and 45.8% (IC95%: 35.8 - 55.8) for SD-Biosensor, Certest, and Rapigen, respectively. The overall specificity for each RDAgT was 100%, 97.7% (IC95%: 96.8 - 98.6), and 100% for SD-Biosensor, Certest, and Rapigen, respectively. However, the limit of detection (LoD) to achieve a sensitivity over 90% was substantially lower for Certest RDAgT (102 copies/uL) compared to SD-Biosensor (103 copies/uL) or Rapigen (106 copies/uL) RDAgTs, considering that the gold standard RT-qPCR method used in this study has a high sensitivity of 97.7% and low LoD of 5 copies/uL. Additionally, the Certest RDAgT also showed an improved sensitivity up to 79.7% (IC95%: 70.2 – 89.2) for symptomatic individuals. Finally, the slight reduction in specificity for Certest RDAgTs was only associated with one of the laboratories performing this study, pointing out the need for locally assessed evaluation for RDAgTs like this one carried out in Ecuador. In conclusion, two of the three the RDAgTs tested in this study are a fast, cheap, and point of care tool for SARS-CoV-2 surveillance and reliable enough to detect SARS-CoV-2 infectious individuals.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Dozens of commercial RT-qPCR kits for SARS-CoV-2 detection are available with or without Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) by FDA or other regulatory agencies. OBJECTIVE: We evaluated the clinical performance of two SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR kits designed and produced in South America, "COVID-19 RT-PCR Real TM FAST (CY5)" (ATGen, Uruguay) and "ECUGEN SARS-CoV-2 RT-qPCR" (UDLA-STARNEWCORP, Ecuador), for RT-qPCR SARS-CoV2 detection using "TaqMan 2019-nCoV Assay Kit v1" (Thermofisher, USA) as a gold standard technique. RESULTS: We report a great clinical performance and analytical sensitivity for the two South American kits with sensitivity values of 96.4 and 100%, specificity of 100% and limit of detection in the range of 10 copies/uL of RNA extraction. CONCLUSIONS: "COVID-19 RT-PCR Real TM FAST (CY5)" and "ECUGEN SARS-CoV-2 RT-qPCR" kits are reliable SARS-CoV-2 tests made in South America that have been extensively used in Uruguay, Argentina, Brazil, Bolivia and Ecuador. These locally produced SARS-CoV-2 tests have contributed to overcome supply shortages and reduce diagnosis cost, while maintaining the high quality standards of FDA EUA commercially available kits. This approach could be extended for other diagnostic products to improve infectious diseases surveillance at middle and low income countries beyond COVID-19 pandemic.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Brazil , COVID-19/diagnosis , Carbocyanines , Ecuador/epidemiology , Humans , Pandemics , RNA, Viral/analysis , RNA, Viral/genetics , Reverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , Sensitivity and Specificity , UruguayABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Several RT-qPCR kits are available for SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis, some of them with Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) by FDA, but most of them lacking of proper evaluation studies due to covid19 emergency. OBJECTIVE: We evaluated Viasure RT-qPCR kit (CerTest Biotec, Spain) for SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis using FDA EUA 2019-nCoV CDC kit (IDT, USA) as a gold standard. RESULTS: Although we found the lack of RNA quality control probe as the main limitation for the Viasure kit, the sensitivity was 91.9% and the specificity was 100%. The limit of detection (LOD) was 2000 copies/mL and 1000 copies/mL for Viasure and IDT kits, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Viasure RT-qPCR kit is a reliable tool for SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis but improvement of an alternative RT-qPCR reaction for RNA extraction quality control as RNaseP is recommended.