Evaluating the field performance of multiple SARS-Cov-2 antigen rapid tests using nasopharyngeal swab samples

PLoS One. 2022 Feb 14;17(2):e0262399. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0262399. eCollection 2022.

Abstract

The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, which started in December 2019, has been posing significant challenges to the health care system worldwide. As the pandemic spreads with rapidly increasing number of positive cases, early diagnosis of infected patients is crucial to successfully limit the spread of the virus. Although the real-time reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR) is the recommended laboratory method to diagnose COVID-19 infection, many factors such as availability of laboratory equipment, reagents and trained personnel affect the use of time-consuming molecular techniques. To facilitate on-the-spot diagnosis of COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen tests were developed by several different manufacturers. The evaluation of such rapid tests is particularly important due to the recent unanimous agreement by the European Commission Member States on a recommendation setting out a framework for the use of antigen rapid tests that contains a list of the mutually recognized assays and the basis of independent validation protocols. To evaluate the on-field performance of ten commercially available SARS-CoV-2 antigen rapid tests (CLINITEST Rapid COVID-19 Antigen Test, GenBody COVID-19 Antigen Test, GENEDIA W COVID-19 Ag Test, Healgen Coronavirus Antigen Rapid Test, Humasis COVID-19 Ag Test, VivaDiag SARS-CoV-2 Ag Rapid Test, Helix i-SARS-CoV-2 Ag Rapid Test, Roche SARS-CoV-2 Rapid Antigen Test, Abbot COVID-19 Ag Rapid Test and Vazyme SARS-CoV-2 Antigen Detection Kit) and compare with RT-qPCR as a reference method, the Hungarian National Public Health Center provided 1,597 antigen rapid tests to the National Ambulance Service, COVID-testing trucks and two hospitals treating COVID-19 patients. Sensitivity, specificity and accuracy were determined by performing the rapid test directly from nasopharyngeal swab samples of symptomatic individuals. For strongly positive samples (Ct < 25) sensitivities ranged between 66.7% and 100%, while for positive samples (Ct < 30) they gave a maximum sensitivity of 87.5%. The specificity of the tests was ranging between 79% to 100%. The results presented here are of high importance to the European Commission and also help governmental decision-making regarding the application of the proper rapid tests for screening different at-risk populations. Nonetheless, SARS-Cov-2 rapid tests play an important role in early and on-the-spot diagnosis of potentially infected individuals.

Publication types

  • Evaluation Study
  • Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

MeSH terms

  • Adolescent
  • Adult
  • Aged
  • Antigens, Viral / immunology*
  • COVID-19 Serological Testing*
  • Child, Preschool
  • Female
  • Humans
  • Male
  • Middle Aged
  • Nasopharynx / virology*
  • Probability
  • Real-Time Polymerase Chain Reaction
  • SARS-CoV-2 / immunology*
  • Sensitivity and Specificity
  • Specimen Handling
  • Young Adult

Substances

  • Antigens, Viral

Grants and funding

The work/publication is supported by the EFOP-1.8.0-VEKOP-17-2017-00001 project.