Engineering Innovative Interfaces for Point-of-Care Diagnostics.

The ongoing Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic illustrates the need for sensitive and reliable tools to diagnose and monitor diseases. Traditional diagnostic approaches rely on centralized laboratory tests that result in long wait times to results and reduce the number of tests that can be given. Point-of-care tests (POCTs) are a group of technologies that miniaturize clinical assays into portable form factors that can be run both in clinical areas --in place of traditional tests-- and outside of traditional clinical settings --to enable new testing paradigms. Hallmark examples of POCTs are the pregnancy test lateral flow assay and the blood glucose meter. Other uses for POCTs include diagnostic assays for diseases like COVID-19, HIV, and malaria but despite some successes, there are still unsolved challenges for fully translating these lower cost and more versatile solutions. To overcome these challenges, researchers have exploited innovations in colloid and interface science to develop various designs of POCTs for clinical applications. Herein, we provide a review of recent advancements in lateral flow assays, other paper based POCTs, protein microarray assays, microbead flow assays, and nucleic acid amplification assays. Features that are desirable to integrate into future POCTs, including simplified sample collection, end-to-end connectivity, and machine learning, are also discussed in this review.

Point-of-Care Sensors in Clinical Environments

Thanks to a general multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary approach, during the last few decades there have been huge advances in the diagnostic field. In particular, the miniaturization and automation of several assays have led to the development of the so-called point-of-care tests (PoCT), which are devices capable to provide accurate and specific detection of analytes such as glucose, other clinically-relevant biomarkers, pathogens, and drugs. The detection with these devices typically takes place in a few minutes and without the need of specialized personnel. Here we discuss the key technologies and applications of PoCTs, as well as the major challenges in the clinical environment. © 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved

Point-of-care laboratory testing in primary care: utilization, limitations and perspectives of general practitioners in Germany.

BACKGROUND: Due to their fast turnaround time and user-friendliness, point-of-care tests (POCTs) possess a great potential in primary care. The purpose of the study was to assess general practitioners' (GPs) perspectives on POCT use in German primary care, including utilization, limitations and requirements. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional survey study among GPs in Germany (federal states of Thuringia, Bremen and Bavaria (Lower Franconia), study period: 04/22-06/2022). RESULTS: From 2,014 GPs reached, 292 participated in our study (response rate: 14.5%). The median number of POCTs used per GP was 7.0 (IQR: 5.0-8.0). Six POCTs are used by the majority of surveyed GPs (> 50%): urine dipstick tests (99%), glucose (urine [91%] and plasma [69%]), SARS-CoV-2 (80%), urine microalbumin (77%), troponin I/T (74%) and prothrombin time / international normalized ratio (65%). The number of utilized POCTs did not differ between GP practice type (p = 0.307) and population size of GP practice location (p = 0.099). The great majority of participating German GPs (93%) rated POCTs as useful diagnostic tools in the GP practice. GPs ranked immediate decisions on patient management and the increase in diagnostic certainty as the most important reasons for performing POCTs. The most frequently reported limitations of POCT use in the GP practice were economic aspects (high costs and inadequate reimbursement), concerns regarding diagnostic accuracy, and difficulties to integrate POCT-testing into practice routines (e.g. time and personnel expenses). CONCLUSION: Although participating German GPs generally perceive POCTs as useful diagnostic tools and numerous POCTs are available, several test-related and contextual factors contribute to the relatively low utilization of POCTs in primary care.

Can we trust in Sars-CoV-2 rapid antigen testing? Preliminary results from a paediatric cohort in the emergency department.

BACKGROUND: Rapid identification of Covid-19 in the paediatric emergency department is critical; Antigen tests are fast but poorly investigated in children. AIMS: To investigate Sars-CoV-2 antigen rapid test in children. METHODS: We compare the performance of LumiraDx with molecular tests in a paediatric emergency department. RESULTS: A retrospective cohort of 191 patients with AT and PCR tests performed in the same episode was analysed; 16% resulted positive for Sars-CoV-2. Using the PCR test as the gold standard, we calculated antigen testing overall sensitivity of 94.1%, specificity of 91.9%, and NPV of 99.4%. Only one false-negative test was found. CONCLUSIONS: AT may be helpful in the initial screening of patients at PED.

Towards a point-of-care test to cover atto-femto and pico-nano molar concentration ranges in interleukin 6 detection exploiting PMMA-based plasmonic biosensor chips.

Point-of-Care tests based on biomarkers, useful to monitor acute and chronic inflammations, are required for advances in medicine. In this scope, a key role is played by pro-inflammatory cytokines, of which interleukin 6 (IL-6) is generally thought as one of the most relevant. To use IL-6 in real scenarios, detection in ultra-low concentration ranges is required. In this work, two IL-6 biosensors are obtained by exploiting the combination of the same antibody self-assembled monolayer with two different plasmonic probes. This approach has demonstrated, via experimental results, that two different IL-6 concentration ranges can be explored. More specifically, IL-6 in an atto-femto molar range can be detected via polymer-based nanoplasmonic chips. On the other hand, a pico-nano molar range is obtained by a surface plasmon resonance platform in plastic optical fibers. As a proof of concept, the detection of IL-6 at the femto molar range has been obtained in Saliva and Serum. The results show that the proposed sensing approach could be useful in developing Point-of-Care devices based on a general setup with the capability to exploit both the plasmonic biosensor chips to monitor the IL-6 in the concentration range of interest, to provide an important support for the diagnosis and monitoring of oral and systemic diseases.

Perspectives of physicians and medical assistants on the implementation of NAAT-based point-of-care testing for SARS-CoV-2 in primary care in Germany.

INTRODUCTION: Given their high diagnostic accuracy and fast turnaround time, rapid SARS-CoV-2 tests based on nucleic acid amplification technologies (NAAT) have great potential to expand access to testing and decrease delays in diagnosis of COVID-19. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to investigate feasibility, acceptance, organizational consequences and other implementation aspects of the use of a NAAT-based SARS-CoV-2 rapid test (ID NOW™ COVID-19, Abbott Diagnostics) for symptomatic primary care patients with a suspected SARS-CoV-2 infection. METHODS: Cross-sectional survey among primary care physicians and medical assistants from Thuringia (Germany) during the third wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in March and April 2021. The health care providers surveyed had previously used the NAAT-based SARS-CoV-2 rapid test as part of a pilot study. RESULTS: Eleven physicians (ten general practitioners and one paediatrician) and 22 medical assistants from Thuringia (Germany) participated in the written survey. Four physicians were additionally interviewed. The majority of the surveyed health care providers rated user-friendliness, integration into practice routine, impact on communication with patients and technical reliability of the NAAT-based SARS-CoV-2 rapid test as (very) positive. Greater workload and the costs for measuring devices were identified as disadvantages compared to PCR laboratory tests. Four out of ten physicians rated the lower sample turnover as unfavourable. CONCLUSION: Our survey shows that NAAT-based point-of-care SARS-CoV-2 testing gained widespread acceptance among physicians and medical assistants, positively influences workflows, can improve patient communication and could therefore be successfully implemented into routine primary care.

Rapid antigen test for COVID-19: A useful weapon in the arsenal of public health

Rapid antigen test has a very important value as one of tools to address the Covid pandemic. Though this test is not as accurate as polymerase chain reaction (PCR) testing. As viral antigen appears before antibody formation in infected person. It is a specific marker of virus. Therefore, for detection of this highly infectious disease at an early stage, viral antigen testing can be a useful strategy in scenario of community transmission to prevent further spread. In India an advisory was issued by ICMR (on 14th June 2020) regarding usage of RAT for quick detection of COVID-19 positive patients. During second wave, Rapid antigen testing was advised only in symptomatic individuals and immediate contacts of laboratory confirmed positive cases. Though no test is perfect when it comes to the attributes of accuracy, accessibility, affordability, and timeliness of results. However, Rapid antigen test can be used as a useful test in public health that can benefit the larger population in breaking the chain of transmission if used wisely in different settings and according to the timeline of symptoms. © Medical Journal of Dr. D.Y. Patil Vidyapeeth 2022.

Point-of-Care Tests for Rapid Detection of Porcine Epidemic Diarrhea Virus: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

The timely and accurate diagnosis of porcine epidemic diarrhea virus (PEDV) infection is crucial to reduce the risk of viral transmission. Therefore, the objective of this review was to evaluate the overall diagnostic accuracy of rapid point-of-care tests (POCTs) for PEDV. Studies published before 7 January 2022 were identified by searching PubMed, EMBASE, Springer Link, and Web of Science databases, using subject headings or keywords related to point of care and rapid test diagnostic for PEDV and PED. Two investigators independently extracted data, rated risk of bias, and assessed the quality using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 tool. The bivariate model and the hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic (HSROC) model were used for performing the meta-analysis. Threshold effect, subgroup analysis, and meta-regression were applied to explore heterogeneity. Of the 2908 records identified, 24 eligible studies involving 3264 specimens were enrolled in the meta-analysis, including 11 studies on evaluation of lateral flow immunochromatography assay (ICA)-based, and 13 on nucleic acid isothermal amplification (NAIA)-based POCTs. The overall pooled sensitivity, specificity and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) were 0.95 (95% CI: 0.92-0.97), 0.96 (95% CI 0.88-0.99) and 480 (95% CI 111-2074), respectively; for ICA-based POCTs and the corresponding values for NAIA-based, POCTs were 0.97 (95% CI 0.94-0.99), 0.98 (95% CI 0.91-0.99) and 1517 (95% CI 290-7943), respectively. The two tests showed highly comparable and satisfactory diagnostic performance in clinical utility. These results support current recommendations for the use of rapid POC tests when PEDV is suspected.

A nationwide analytical and clinical evaluation of 44 rapid antigen tests for SARS-CoV-2 compared to RT-qPCR.

BACKGROUND: The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has resulted in massive testing by Rapid Antigen Tests (RAT) without solid independent data regarding clinical performance being available. Thus, decision on purchase of a specific RAT may rely on manufacturer-provided data and limited peer-reviewed data. METHODS: This study consists of two parts. In the retrospective analytical part, 33 RAT from 25 manufacturers were compared to RT-PCR on 100 negative and 204 positive deep oropharyngeal cavity samples divided into four groups based on RT-PCR Cq levels. In the prospective clinical part, nearly 200 individuals positive for SARS-CoV-2 and nearly 200 individuals negative for SARS-CoV-2 by routine RT-PCR testing were retested within 72 h for each of 44 included RAT from 26 manufacturers applying RT-PCR as the reference method. RESULTS: The overall analytical sensitivity differed significantly between the 33 included RAT; from 2.5% (95% CI 0.5-4.8) to 42% (95% CI 35-49). All RAT presented analytical specificities of 100%. Likewise, the overall clinical sensitivity varied significantly between the 44 included RAT; from 2.5% (95% CI 0.5-4.8) to 94% (95% CI 91-97). All RAT presented clinical specificities between 98 and 100%. CONCLUSION: The study presents analytical as well as clinical performance data for 44 commercially available RAT compared to the same RT-PCR test. The study enables identification of individual RAT that has significantly higher sensitivity than other included RAT and may aid decision makers in selecting between the included RAT. FUNDING: The study was funded by a participant fee for each test and the Danish Regions.

Diagnostic accuracy of point-of-care tests in acute community-acquired lower respiratory tract infections. A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Point-of-care tests could be essential in differentiating bacterial and viral acute community-acquired lower respiratory tract infections and driving antibiotic stewardship in the community. OBJECTIVES: To assess diagnostic test accuracy of point-of-care tests in community settings for acute community-acquired lower respiratory tract infections. DATA SOURCES: Multiple databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Open Gray) from inception to 31 May 2021, without language restrictions. STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Diagnostic test accuracy studies involving patients at primary care, outpatient clinic, emergency department and long-term care facilities with a clinical suspicion of acute community-acquired lower respiratory tract infections. The comparator was any test used as a comparison to the index test. In order not to limit the study inclusion, the comparator was not defined a priori. ASSESSMENT OF RISK OF BIAS: Four investigators independently extracted data, rated risk of bias, and assessed the quality using QUADAS-2. METHODS OF DATA SYNTHESIS: The measures of diagnostic test accuracy were calculated with 95% CI. RESULTS: A total of 421 studies addressed at least one point-of-care test. The diagnostic performance of molecular tests was higher compared with that of rapid diagnostic tests for all the pathogens studied. The accuracy of stand-alone signs and symptoms or biomarkers was poor. Lung ultrasound showed high sensitivity and specificity (90% for both) for the diagnosis of bacterial pneumonia. Rapid antigen-based diagnostic tests for influenza, respiratory syncytial virus, human metapneumovirus, and Streptococcus pneumoniae had sub-optimal sensitivity (range 49%-84%) but high specificity (>80%). DISCUSSION: Physical examination and host biomarkers are not sufficiently reliable as stand-alone tests to differentiate between bacterial and viral pneumonia. Lung ultrasound shows higher accuracy than chest X-ray for bacterial pneumonia at emergency department. Rapid antigen-based diagnostic tests cannot be considered fully reliable because of high false-negative rates. Overall, molecular tests for all the pathogens considered were found to be the most accurate.

SARS-CoV-2 Antibody Rapid Tests: Valuable Epidemiological Tools in Challenging Settings.

During the last year, mass screening campaigns have been carried out to identify immunological response to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and establish a possible seroprevalence. The obtained results gained new importance with the beginning of the SARS-CoV-2 vaccination campaign, as the lack of doses has persuaded several countries to introduce different policies for individuals who had a history of COVID-19. Lateral flow assays (LFAs) may represent an affordable tool to support population screening in low-middle-income countries, where diagnostic tests are lacking and epidemiology is still widely unknown. However, LFAs have demonstrated a wide range of performance, and the question of which one could be more valuable in these settings still remains. We evaluated the performance of 11 LFAs in detecting SARS-CoV-2 infection, analyzing samples collected from 350 subjects. In addition, samples from 57 health care workers collected at 21 to 24 days after the first dose of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine were also evaluated. LFAs demonstrated a wide range of specificity (92.31% to 100%) and sensitivity (50% to 100%). The analysis of postvaccination samples was used to describe the most suitable tests to detect IgG response against S protein receptor binding domain (RBD). Tuberculosis (TB) therapy was identified as a potential factor affecting the specificity of LFAs. This analysis identified which LFAs represent a valuable tool not only for the detection of prior SARS-CoV-2 infection but also for the detection of IgG elicited in response to vaccination. These results demonstrated that different LFAs may have different applications and the possible risks of their use in high-TB-burden settings. IMPORTANCE Our study provides a fresh perspective on the possible employment of SARS-CoV-2 LFA antibody tests. We developed an in-depth, large-scale analysis comparing LFA performance to enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) and electrochemiluminescence immunoassay (ECLIA) and evaluating their sensitivity and specificity in identifying COVID-19 patients at different time points from symptom onset. Moreover, for the first time, we analyzed samples of patients undergoing treatment for endemic poverty-related diseases, especially tuberculosis, and we evaluated the impact of this therapy on test specificity in order to assess possible performance in TB high-burden countries.

Laboratory diagnosis of novel corona virus (2019-nCoV)-present and the future.

BACKGROUND: In December 2019 a novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 emerged in the Hunan seafood market in Wuhan, China, and soon became a global health problem. Since its outbreak, SARS-CoV-2 has had a major impact on clinical diagnostic laboratories. The scientific community has quickly risen to the occasion and reports of new developments have arrived at an unprecedented scale. At present, there is a growing list of over 400 SARC-CoV-2 diagnostic tests either in development or approved for clinical use. This presentation reviews the current laboratory methods available for testing COVID- 19 in microbiology laboratories and also provides an insight into the future diagnostics approaches. METHODS: Proper respiratory specimen collected at the appropriate time and from the right anatomical site is critical in the accurate and timely diagnosis of SARSCoV2. While oropharyngeal and nasopharyngeal swabs are recommended for the detection of early infection, other lower respiratory tract specimens like the sputum and bronchoalveolar lavage are used for late detection and monitoring of patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: Real-time RT-PCR based molecular assay remains the test of choice for the etiological diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 while serological tests are being introduced as supplementary tools. Finally, there is an urgent need for scaling up the diagnostic capacity by the introduction of reliable and accurate point-of-care tests which will assist in effective control of this outbreak. These assays can be used in the local hospitals and clinics bearing the burden of identifying and treating patients.

Rapid community point-of-care testing for COVID-19 (RAPTOR-C19): protocol for a platform diagnostic study.

BACKGROUND: The aim of RApid community Point-of-care Testing fOR COVID-19 (RAPTOR-C19) is to assess the diagnostic accuracy of multiple current and emerging point-of-care tests (POCTs) for active and past SARS-CoV2 infection in the community setting. RAPTOR-C19 will provide the community testbed to the COVID-19 National DiagnOstic Research and Evaluation Platform (CONDOR). METHODS: RAPTOR-C19 incorporates a series of prospective observational parallel diagnostic accuracy studies of SARS-CoV2 POCTs against laboratory and composite reference standards in patients with suspected current or past SARS-CoV2 infection attending community settings. Adults and children with suspected current SARS-CoV2 infection who are having an oropharyngeal/nasopharyngeal (OP/NP) swab for laboratory SARS-CoV2 reverse transcriptase Digital/Real-Time Polymerase Chain Reaction (d/rRT-PCR) as part of clinical care or community-based testing will be invited to participate. Adults (≥ 16 years) with suspected past symptomatic infection will also be recruited. Asymptomatic individuals will not be eligible. At the baseline visit, all participants will be asked to submit samples for at least one candidate point-of-care test (POCT) being evaluated (index test/s) as well as an OP/NP swab for laboratory SARS-CoV2 RT-PCR performed by Public Health England (PHE) (reference standard for current infection). Adults will also be asked for a blood sample for laboratory SARS-CoV-2 antibody testing by PHE (reference standard for past infection), where feasible adults will be invited to attend a second visit at 28 days for repeat antibody testing. Additional study data (e.g. demographics, symptoms, observations, household contacts) will be captured electronically. Sensitivity, specificity, positive, and negative predictive values for each POCT will be calculated with exact 95% confidence intervals when compared to the reference standard. POCTs will also be compared to composite reference standards constructed using paired antibody test results, patient reported outcomes, linked electronic health records for outcomes related to COVID-19 such as hospitalisation or death, and other test results. DISCUSSION: High-performing POCTs for community use could be transformational. Real-time results could lead to personal and public health impacts such as reducing onward household transmission of SARS-CoV2 infection, improving surveillance of health and social care staff, contributing to accurate prevalence estimates, and understanding of SARS-CoV2 transmission dynamics in the population. In contrast, poorly performing POCTs could have negative effects, so it is necessary to undertake community-based diagnostic accuracy evaluations before rolling these out. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN, ISRCTN14226970.

Loop-Mediated Isothermal Amplification (LAMP): A Rapid, Sensitive, Specific, and Cost-Effective Point-of-Care Test for Coronaviruses in the Context of COVID-19 Pandemic.

The rampant spread of COVID-19 and the worldwide prevalence of infected cases demand a rapid, simple, and cost-effective Point of Care Test (PoCT) for the accurate diagnosis of this pandemic. The most common molecular tests approved by regulatory bodies across the world for COVID-19 diagnosis are based on Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR). While PCR-based tests are highly sensitive, specific, and remarkably reliable, they have many limitations ranging from the requirement of sophisticated laboratories, need of skilled personnel, use of complex protocol, long wait times for results, and an overall high cost per test. These limitations have inspired researchers to search for alternative diagnostic methods that are fast, economical, and executable in low-resource laboratory settings. The discovery of Loop-mediated isothermal Amplification (LAMP) has provided a reliable substitute platform for the accurate detection of low copy number nucleic acids in the diagnosis of several viral diseases, including epidemics like Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) and Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS). At present, a cocktail of LAMP assay reagents along with reverse transcriptase enzyme (Reverse Transcription LAMP, RT-LAMP) can be a robust solution for the rapid and cost-effective diagnosis for COVID-19, particularly in developing, and low-income countries. In summary, the development of RT-LAMP based diagnostic tools in a paper/strip format or the integration of this method into a microfluidic platform such as a Lab-on-a-chip may revolutionize the concept of PoCT for COVID-19 diagnosis. This review discusses the principle, technology and past research underpinning the success for using this method for diagnosing MERS and SARS, in addition to ongoing research, and the prominent prospect of RT-LAMP in the context of COVID-19 diagnosis.

Detection of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies using commercial assays and seroconversion patterns in hospitalized patients.

OBJECTIVES: SARS-CoV-2 antibody assays are needed for serological surveys and as a complement to molecular tests to confirm COVID-19. However, the kinetics of the humoral response against SARS-CoV-2 remains poorly described and relies on the performance of the different serological tests. METHODS: In this study, we evaluated the performance of six CE-marked point-of-care tests (POC) and three ELISA assays for the diagnosis of COVID-19 by exploring seroconversions in hospitalized patients who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 RNA. RESULTS: Both the ELISA and POC tests were able to detect SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in at least half of the samples collected seven days or more after the onset of symptoms. After 15 days, the rate of detection rose to over 80% but without reaching 100%, irrespective of the test used. More than 90% of the samples collected after 15 days tested positive using the iSIA and Accu-Tell® POC tests and the ID.Vet IgG ELISA assay. Seroconversion was observed 5 to 12 days after the onset of symptoms. Three assays suffer from a specificity below 90% (EUROIMMUN IgG and IgA, UNscience, Zhuhai Livzon). CONCLUSIONS: The second week of COVID-19 seems to be the best period for assessing the sensitivity of commercial serological assays. To achieve an early diagnosis of COVID-19 based on antibody detection, a dual challenge must be met: the immunodiagnostic window period must be shortened and an optimal specificity must be conserved.