ABSTRACT
Background: WHO recommends the use of COVID-19 antigen rapid diagnostic tests (Ag-RDT) with at least 80 % sensitivity and 97 % specificity. In the era of Omicron variants, we sought to ascertain the performance of the INDICAID™ Ag-RDT compared to real-time PCR (RT-PCR) as the gold standard. Methods: A laboratory-based study was conducted among consenting individuals tested for COVID-19 at the virology laboratory of the Chantal BIYA International Reference Centre, Yaoundé-Cameron. The samples were processed by INDICAID™ Ag-RDT and DaAn Gene real-time PCR according to the manufacturer's instructions, and PCR-results were interpreted as per cycle thresholds (CT). The sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values (PPV and NVP) of INDICAID™ Ag-RDT were evaluated according to PCR CT-values. Results: A total of 565 nasopharyngeal swabs were collected from participants (median age [IQR]: 40 [31-75]; M/F sex-ratio was 1.2 and 380 were vaccinated). Following PCR, overall COVID-19 positivity was 5.66 %. For CT < 37, INDICAID™ Ag-RDT sensitivity was 21.9 % (95%CI: [8.3-39.9]), specificity 100 % (95%CI: [99.3-100]); PPV 100 % (95%CI: [59.0-100]), NPV 95.5 % (95%CI: [93.4-97.1]) and kappa = 0.34 (95%CI: [0.19-0.35]). For CT < 25, sensitivity was 100 % (95%CI: [47.8-100.0]), specificity 99.6 % (95%CI: [98.7-99.9]); PPV 94.4 % (95%CI: [51.7-100]), NPV 100 % (95%CI: [99.3-100]) and kappa = 0.83 (95%CI: [0.6-1.0]). COVID-19 sequences generated were all Omicron BA.1 subvariants. Conclusion: For patients infected with high viral loads (CT < 25), INDICAID™ Ag-RDT has high intrinsic (sensitivity and specificity) and extrinsic (predictive values) performances for COVID-19 diagnosis. Due to its simplicity and short turnaround time, INDICAID™ Ag-RDT is, therefore a reliable tool to prevent the spread of COVID-19 at community level in the current era of Omicron subvariants.
ABSTRACT
Molecular diagnosis of COVID-19 is critical to the control of the pandemic, which is a major threat to global health. Several molecular tests have been validated by WHO, but would require operational evaluation in the field to ensure their interoperability in diagnosis. In order to ensure field interoperability in molecular assays for detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA, we evaluated the diagnostic concordance of SARS-CoV-2 between an automated (Abbott) and a manual (DaAn gene) realtime PCR (rRT-PCR), two commonly used assays in Africa. A comparative study was conducted on 287 nasopharyngeal specimens at the Chantal BIYA International Reference Centre (CIRCB) in Yaounde- Cameroon. Samples were tested in parallel with Abbott and DaAn gene rRT-PCR, and performance characteristics were evaluated by Cohen's coefficient and Spearman's correlation. A total of 273 participants [median age (IQR) 36 (26-46) years] and 14 EQA specimens were included in the study. Positivity was on 30.0% (86/287) Abbott and 37.6% (108/287) DaAn gene. Overall agreement was 82.6% (237/287), with k=0.82 (95%CI: 0.777-0.863), indicating an excellent diagnostic agreement. The positive and negative agreement was 66.67% (72/108) and 92.18 % (165/179) respectively. Regarding Viral Load (VL), positive agreement was 100% for samples with high VLs (CT<20). Among positive SARS-CoV- 2 cases, the mean difference in Cycle Threshold (CT) for the manual and Cycle Number (CN) for the automated was 6.75±0.3. The excellent agreement (>80%) between the Abbott and DaAn gene rRTPCR platforms supports interoperability between the two assays. Discordance occurs at low-VL, thus underscoring these tools as efficient weapons in limiting SARS-CoV-2 community transmission.
