ABSTRACT
Early detection of SARS-CoV-2 infection is crucial to prevent the spread of the virus. In this study, we evaluated the performance of a commercial rapid antigen detection test, BD Veritor, and compared this (and another rapid test, Standard Q) against a gold-standard of nasopharyngeal (NP) swab tested by reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) in prospectively-recruited adults in Dhaka, Bangladesh. We compared the sensitivity and specificity of the two rapid antigen tests against RT-PCR results in 130 symptomatic and 130 asymptomatic adults. In addition, we evaluated the suitability and ease-of-use of the BD Veritor test in a subsample of study participants (n=42) and implementers (n=5). The sensitivity of the BD Veritor rapid antigen test was 70% in symptomatic (95% confidence interval [CI]: 51-85%) and 87% (95% CI: 69-96%) in asymptomatic individuals with positive SARSCoV-2 RT-PCR, for overall sensitivity of 78% (95% CI: 66-88%). The sensitivity of the Standard Q rapid antigen test was 63% (95% CI: 44-80%) in symptomatic and 73% (95% CI: 54-87%) in asymptomatic individuals. One false positive in BD Veritor test (specificity 99.5) and no false positive in Standard Q tests were observed (specificity 100%). The BD Veritor rapid antigen test was 78% sensitive when compared with RT-PCR irrespective of the cycle threshold (Ct) levels in this evaluation in Bangladesh. The implementation evaluation data showed good acceptability in the field settings. This warrants large field evaluation as well as use of the rapid antigen test for quick assessment of SARS-CoV-2 for containment of epidemics in the country.
ABSTRACT
As the United States prepares to return to work and open up the economy in the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic without an available vaccine or effective therapy, testing and contact tracing are essential to contain and limit the spread of the COVID-19 virus. In response to the urgent public health need for accurate, effective, low-cost, and scalable COVID-19 testing technology, we evaluated and identified diagnostic solutions with potential for use as an at-home product. We conducted a deep horizon scan for antigen and serology-based diagnostics and down-selected to the most promising technologies. A total of 303 candidate products (138 antibody and 44 antigen tests) were identified. Product evaluations were based entirely on company-provided data. 73 serology-based antibody tests passing an initial scoring algorithm based on specificity and sensitivity data were then further evaluated using a second scoring algorithm. This second algorithm included a review of additional technical specifications of the devices, an analysis of supply chain, manufacturing, and distribution capacity of each vendor. 24 potential antibody products met the selection criteria for further direct laboratory evaluation. The performance metrics for selection of these 24 products are currently being evaluated in a Mass General Brigham laboratory. Testing alone might not be sufficient to prevent the spread of a highly contagious disease like COVID-19. Manual contact tracing could complement testing, but it is likely to fail in identifying many individuals who were in contact with a given COVID patient. The proliferation of smartphones in the population has enabled the development of solutions that can provide public health officials with valuable information for rapid and accurate contact tracing. Besides, electronic-based contact tracing solutions can be augmented by symptom self-reports gathered using electronic patient reported outcome (ePRO) platforms and by physiological data collected using wearable sensors. We performed a detailed assessment of 12 ePRO solutions, 27 wearable sensors, and 44 electronic-based contact tracing solutions. These technologies were evaluated using criteria developed to assess their suitability to address the COVID-19 pandemic. We identified a number of solutions that could augment if not provide a more effective alternative to manual contact tracing. Finally, we propose a theoretical framework in which ePRO platforms, wearable sensors, and electronic-based contact tracing solutions would be utilized in combination with molecular and serological tests to identify and isolate COVID-19 cases rapidly.
