Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 6 de 6
Filter
1.
Health Sci Rep ; 6(5): e1275, 2023 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2323923

ABSTRACT

Background and Aims: Saliva samples are less invasive and more convenient for patients than naso- and/or oropharynx swabs (NOS). However, there is no US Food and Drug Administration-approved severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) rapid antigen test kit, which can be useful in a prolonged pandemic to reduce transmission by allowing suspected individuals to self-sampling. We evaluated the performances of High sensitive AQ+ Rapid SARS-CoV-2 Antigen Test (AQ+ kit) using nasopharyngeal swabs (NPs) and saliva specimens from the same patients in laboratory conditions. Methods: The real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR) test result was used for screening the inrolled individuals and compared as the gold standard. NP and saliva samples were collected from 100 rRT-PCR positives and 100 negative individuals and tested with an AQ+ kit. Results: The AQ+ kit showed good performances in both NP and saliva samples with an overall accuracy of 98.5% and 94.0%, and sensitivity of 97.0% and 88.0%, respectively. In both cases, specificity was 100%. AQ+ kit performance with saliva was in the range of the World Health Organization recommended value. Conclusion: xOur findings indicate that the saliva specimen can be used as an alternative and less invasive to NPs for quick and reliable SARS-CoV-2 antigen detection.

3.
Sci Rep ; 12(1): 1438, 2022 01 26.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1655618

ABSTRACT

The protection against emerging SARS-CoV-2 variants by pre-existing antibodies elicited due to the current vaccination or natural infection is a global concern. We aimed to investigate the rate of SARS-CoV-2 infection and its clinical features among infection-naïve, infected, vaccinated, and post-infection-vaccinated individuals. A cohort was designed among icddr,b staff registered for COVID-19 testing by real-time reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR). Reinfection cases were confirmed by whole-genome sequencing. From 19 March 2020 to 31 March 2021, 1644 (mean age, 38.4 years and 57% male) participants were enrolled; where 1080 (65.7%) were tested negative and added to the negative cohort. The positive cohort included 750 positive patients (564 from baseline and 186 from negative cohort follow-up), of whom 27.6% were hospitalized and 2.5% died. Among hospitalized patients, 45.9% had severe to critical disease and 42.5% required oxygen support. Hypertension and diabetes mellitus were found significantly higher among the hospitalised patients compared to out-patients; risk ratio 1.3 and 1.6 respectively. The risk of infection among positive cohort was 80.2% lower than negative cohort (95% CI 72.6-85.7%; p < 0.001). Genome sequences showed that genetically distinct SARS-CoV-2 strains were responsible for reinfections. Naturally infected populations were less likely to be reinfected by SARS-CoV-2 than the infection-naïve and vaccinated individuals. Although, reinfected individuals did not suffer severe disease, a remarkable proportion of naturally infected or vaccinated individuals were (re)-infected by the emerging variants.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/pathology , Reinfection/epidemiology , Adult , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/virology , Cohort Studies , Diabetes Complications/pathology , Female , Humans , Hypertension/complications , Male , Middle Aged , RNA, Viral/analysis , RNA, Viral/metabolism , Reinfection/diagnosis , Reinfection/virology , Risk , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , SARS-CoV-2/physiology , Severity of Illness Index , Vaccination/statistics & numerical data
4.
J Clin Lab Anal ; 36(2): e24203, 2022 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1589068

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Globally, real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR) is the reference detection technique for SARS-CoV-2, which is expensive, time consuming, and requires trained laboratory personnel. Thus, a cost-effective, rapid antigen test is urgently needed. This study evaluated the performance of the rapid antigen tests (RATs) for SARS-CoV-2 compared with rRT-PCR, considering different influencing factors. METHODS: We enrolled a total of 214 symptomatic individuals with known COVID-19 status using rRT-PCR. We collected and tested paired nasopharyngeal (NP) and nasal swab (NS) specimens (collected from same individual) using rRT-PCR and RATs (InTec and SD Biosensor). We assessed the performance of RATs considering specimen types, viral load, the onset of symptoms, and presenting symptoms. RESULTS: We included 214 paired specimens (112 NP and 100 NS SARS-CoV-2 rRT-PCR positive) to the analysis. For NP specimens, the average sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of the RATs were 87.5%, 98.6%, and 92.8%, respectively, when compared with rRT-PCR. While for NS, the overall kit performance was slightly lower than that of NP (sensitivity 79.0%, specificity 96.1%, and accuracy 88.3%). We observed a progressive decline in the performance of RATs with increased Ct values (decreased viral load). Moreover, the RAT sensitivity using NP specimens decreased over the time of the onset of symptoms. CONCLUSION: The RATs showed strong performance under field conditions and fulfilled the minimum performance limit for rapid antigen detection kits recommended by World Health Organization. The best performance of the RATs can be achieved within the first week of the onset of symptoms with high viral load.


Subject(s)
Antigens, Viral/analysis , COVID-19 Serological Testing , COVID-19/diagnosis , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19 Serological Testing/methods , COVID-19 Serological Testing/standards , COVID-19 Serological Testing/statistics & numerical data , Child , Child, Preschool , Female , Humans , Infant , Male , Middle Aged , Nasopharynx/virology , Reagent Kits, Diagnostic/virology , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Sensitivity and Specificity , Time Factors , Viral Load , Young Adult
6.
Microbiol Resour Announc ; 10(8)2021 Feb 25.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1105405

ABSTRACT

The coding-complete genome sequence of a coronavirus strain, SARS-CoV-2/human/BGD/G039392/2021, obtained from a symptomatic male patient with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in Dhaka, Bangladesh, is reported. The strain G039392 is 99.9% identical to the UK variant B.1.1.7.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL