Comparing the diagnostic performance between Rapid antigen and RTPCR for the detection of SARS CoV2 in a tertiary care hospital in South India
Authors/Creators
- 1. Assistant Professor, Department of Surgery, Panimalar Medical College Hospital & Research Institute, Chennai
- 2. Tutor, Department of Molecular Virology, Panimalar Medical College Hospital & Research Institute, Chennai
- 3. Assistant Professor, Department of General Medicine, Panimalar Medical College Hospital & Research Institute, Chennai
- 4. Lab director, Department of Molecular Virology, Panimalar Medical College Hospital & Research Institute, Chennai
- 5. Tutor, Department of Microbiology, Panimalar Medical College Hospital & Research Institute, Chennai
- 6. Professor, Department of Microbiology, Panimalar Medical College Hospital & Research Institute, Chennai
- 7. Head, Department of Molecular Virology & Professor, Department of Biochemistry, Panimalar Medical College Hospital & Research Institute, Chennai
Description
Background: COVID-19 rapid antigen test plays a crucial role in managing the COVID-19 pandemic by diagnosing COVID-19 infection. However, the sensitivity and specificity of rapid antigen tests are not known because there are no adequate studies to substantiate. While PCR-tests are considered as the gold standard assay to confirm infection with the SARS-CoV-2 infection because of their sensitivity as well as specificity, antigen tests offer more advantages in terms of low cost, time, space constraints and personnel involved and are implemented in testing strategies around the world and antigen testing can be deployed for testing many individuals, considering their advantages cited above. Objectives: The aim of this study was to assess the diagnostic accuracy (sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value) of STANDARD Q rapid antigen test kit in diagnosing SARS-CoV-2 infection in a tertiary care testing facility and compare it with the standard RT- PCR test.
Methods: The patients reporting to COVID-19 sample collection center of the tertiary care testing facility were included in the study after getting proper consent. A total of 400 patients were involved in the study. Nasopharyngeal swabs were obtained from the study participants and the STANDARD Q rapid antigen test was run in parallel with real-time PCR tests and both the results were documented. Results: Among the 400 patients who were included in the study, RT-PCR was positive in 95 individuals, with a prevalence of 23.75% and negative in 305 patients (76.25%). The sensitivity of the rapid antigen test was 88.4% and the specificity was 100 %. The positive and negative predictive values were 100% and 96.52% respectively. Conclusion: The accuracy of the SARS-CoV-2 STANDARD Q rapid antigen test in diagnosing SARS-CoV-2 infections in a tertiary care testing facility was almost equal when compared with the manufacturer’s data. However they can be used for mass screening purposes considering their ease of use, portability and convenience. The Area under the Curve (AUC) is 0.942 which signifies that the kit can distinguish well between the true positive and true negative.
Abstract (English)
Background: COVID-19 rapid antigen test plays a crucial role in managing the COVID-19 pandemic by diagnosing COVID-19 infection. However, the sensitivity and specificity of rapid antigen tests are not known because there are no adequate studies to substantiate. While PCR-tests are considered as the gold standard assay to confirm infection with the SARS-CoV-2 infection because of their sensitivity as well as specificity, antigen tests offer more advantages in terms of low cost, time, space constraints and personnel involved and are implemented in testing strategies around the world and antigen testing can be deployed for testing many individuals, considering their advantages cited above. Objectives: The aim of this study was to assess the diagnostic accuracy (sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value) of STANDARD Q rapid antigen test kit in diagnosing SARS-CoV-2 infection in a tertiary care testing facility and compare it with the standard RT- PCR test.
Methods: The patients reporting to COVID-19 sample collection center of the tertiary care testing facility were included in the study after getting proper consent. A total of 400 patients were involved in the study. Nasopharyngeal swabs were obtained from the study participants and the STANDARD Q rapid antigen test was run in parallel with real-time PCR tests and both the results were documented. Results: Among the 400 patients who were included in the study, RT-PCR was positive in 95 individuals, with a prevalence of 23.75% and negative in 305 patients (76.25%). The sensitivity of the rapid antigen test was 88.4% and the specificity was 100 %. The positive and negative predictive values were 100% and 96.52% respectively. Conclusion: The accuracy of the SARS-CoV-2 STANDARD Q rapid antigen test in diagnosing SARS-CoV-2 infections in a tertiary care testing facility was almost equal when compared with the manufacturer’s data. However they can be used for mass screening purposes considering their ease of use, portability and convenience. The Area under the Curve (AUC) is 0.942 which signifies that the kit can distinguish well between the true positive and true negative.
Files
IJPCR,Vol15,Issue12,Article201.pdf
Files
(1.2 MB)
| Name | Size | Download all |
|---|---|---|
|
md5:515c6a9228af8dc8ba56f5398b624951
|
1.2 MB | Preview Download |
Additional details
Dates
- Accepted
-
2023-11-30
Software
- Repository URL
- https://impactfactor.org/PDF/IJPCR/15/IJPCR,Vol15,Issue12,Article201.pdf
- Development Status
- Active
References
- 1. WHO Coronavirus (COVID-19) Dashboard Available at covid19.who.int/ 2. WHO Director-General's opening remarks at the media briefing on COVID19 -March 2020 Available at www.who.int/directorgeneral/speeches/detail/who-director-generals-opening-remarks-at-the-media-briefing-oncovid-19---11-march-2020.3. Overview of Testing for SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19 Updated Feb. 11, 2022. Content source: National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases (NCIRD), Division of Viral Diseases 4. Afzal A. Molecular diagnostic technologies for COVID-19: Limitations and challenges. J Adv Res. 2020; 26:149-159. 5. Das P, Mondal S, Pal S, et al. COVID diagnostics by molecular methods: A systematic review of nucleic acid-based testing systems. Indian J Med Microbiol. 2021; 39(3): 271-278. 6. Falzone L, Gattuso G, Tsatsakis A, Spandidos DA, Libra M. Current and innovative methods for the diagnosis of COVID-19 infection (Review). Int J Mol Med. 2021;47(6):100. 7. Kretzschmar ME, Rozhnova G, Bootsma MCJ, van Boven M, van de Wijgert JHHM, Bonten MJM. Impact of delays on effectiveness of contact tracing strategies for COVID-19: a modelling study. Lancet Public Health. 2020; 5(8):e452-e459. 8. Cerutti F, Burdino E, Milia MG, et al. Urgent need of rapid tests for SARS CoV-2 antigen detection: Evaluation of the SD-Biosensor antigen test for SARS-CoV-2. J Clin Virol. 2020; 132:104654. 9. Ying Lv, Yuanyuan Ma, Yanhui Si, Xiaoyi Zhu, Lin Zhang, Haiyan Feng, Di Tian, Yixin Liao, Tiefu Liu, Hongzhou Lu, Yun Ling, Rapid SARS-CoV-2 antigen detection potentiates early diagnosis of COVID-19 disease, BioScience Trends. 2021; 15(2):93- 99. 10. Mak GC, Cheng PK, Lau SS, et al. Evaluation of rapid antigen test for detection of SARSCoV-2 virus. J Clin Virol. 2020; 129:104500. 11. Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) 2021 Case Definition Available at https:// ndc.services.cdc.gov/case-definitions/ coronavirus-disease-2019-2021/ 12. STANDARD TM Q COVID-19 Ag Test kit insert. 13. VA COVID-19 Qualitative Real time PCR kit manual Version A 14. Wahab SF, Løgstrup BB. Atypical manifestations of COVID-19 in general practice: a case of gastrointestinal symptoms. BMJ Case Rep. 2020; 13(8): e237520. Published 2020 Aug 27. 15. Falzone L, Gattuso G, Tsatsakis A, Spandidos DA, Libra M. Current and innovative methods for the diagnosis of COVID-19 infection (Review). Int J Mol Med. 2021;47(6):100. 16. Treggiari D, Piubelli C, Caldrer S, Mistretta M, Ragusa A, Orza P, Pajola B, Piccoli D, Conti A, Lorenzi C, Serafini V, Boni M, Perandin F. SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen test in comparison to RT-PCR targeting different genes: A real-life evaluation among unselected patients in a regional hospital of Italy. J Med Virol. 2022 Mar; 94(3):1190-1195. 17. Diez Flecha C, Rivero Rodríguez AM, Fernández-Villa T, et al. [Internal validity of a rapid test for COVID-19 antigens in a nursing home]. Semergen. 2021 Jul-Aug; 47(5):332- 336. 18. Turcato G, Zaboli A, Pfeifer N, et al. Rapid antigen test to identify COVID-19 infected patients with and without symptoms admitted to the Emergency Department. Am J Emerg Med. 2022; 51:92-97. 19. Nordgren J, Sharma S, Olsson H, et al. SARSCoV-2 rapid antigen test: High sensitivity to detect infectious virus. J Clin Virol. 2021; 140:104846. 20. Escrivá BF, Mochón MDO, González RM, et al. "The effectiveness of rapid antigen testbased for SARS-CoV-2 detection in nursing homes in Valencia, Spain". J Clin Virol. 2021; 143:104941. 21. Brümmer LE, Katzenschlager S, Gaeddert M, Erdmann C, Schmitz S, Bota M, et al. Accuracy of novel antigen rapid diagnostics for SARS-CoV-2: A living systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS Med. 2021; 18(8): e1003735. 22. Scohy A, Anantharajah A, Bodéus M, Kabamba-Mukadi B, Verroken A, RodriguezVillalobos H. Low performance of rapid antigen detection test as frontline testing for COVID-19 diagnosis. J Clin Virol. 2020; 129:104455. 23. Begum, MN, Jubair, M, Nahar, K, et al. Factors influencing the performance of rapid SARS-CoV-2 antigen tests under field condition. J Clin Lab Anal. 2022; 36:e24203. 24. Chaimayo C, Kaewnaphan B, Tanlieng N, et al. Rapid SARS-CoV-2 antigen detection assay in comparison with real-time RT-PCR assay for laboratory diagnosis of COVID-19 in Thailand. Virol J. 2020;17(1):177. Published 2020 Nov 13. 25. Candel FJ, Barreiro P, San Román J, et al. Recommendations for use of antigenic tests in the diagnosis of acute SARS-CoV-2 infection in the second pandemic wave: attitude in different clinical settings. Rev Esp Quimioter. 2020; 33(6):466-484 26. Krüttgen A, Cornelissen CG, Dreher M, Hornef MW, Imöhl M, Kleines M. Comparison of the SARS-CoV-2 Rapid antigen test to the real star Sars-CoV-2 RT PCR kit. J Virol Methods. 2021; 288:114024. 27. Diao B, Wen K, Zhang J, et al. Accuracy of a nucleocapsid protein antigen rapid test in the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2021;27(2):289.e1-289.e4.28. Mitchell, S.L., Orris, S., Freeman, T. et al. Performance of SARS-CoV-2 antigen testing in symptomatic and asymptomatic adults: a single-center evaluation. BMC Infect Dis. 2021; 21: 1071. 29. Interim Guidance for Antigen Testing for SARS-CoV-2. Updated Jan. 20, 2022 30. Antigen-detection in the diagnosis of SARSCoV-2 infection. Interim guidance 6 October 2021 31. Mónica Peña, Manuel Ampuero, Carlos Garcés, Aldo Gaggero, Patricia García, María Soledad Velasquez, Ricardo Luza, Pía Alvarez, Fabio Paredes, Johanna Acevedo, Mauricio J. Farfán, Sandra Solari, Ricardo Soto-Rifo, Fernando Valiente-Echeverría, Performance of SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen test compared with real-time RT-PCR in asymptomatic individuals, International Journal of Infectious Diseases, 2021; 107: 201-204, 32. Peña M, Ampuero M, Garcés C, Gaggero A, García P, Velasquez MS, Luza R, Alvarez P, Paredes F, Acevedo J, Farfán MJ, Solari S, Soto-Rifo R, Valiente-Echeverría F. Performance of SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen test compared with real-time RT-PCR in asymptomatic individuals. Int J Infect Dis. 2021 Jun; 107:201-204. 33. Chu VT, Schwartz NG, Donnelly MAP, Chuey MR, Soto R, Yousaf AR, Schmitt-Matzen EN, Sleweon S, Ruffin J, Thornburg N, Harcourt JL, Tamin A, Kim G, Folster JM, Hughes LJ, Tong S, Stringer G, Albanese BA, Totten SE, Hudziec MM, Matzinger SR, Dietrich EA, Sheldon SW, Stous S, McDonald EC, Austin B, Beatty ME, Staples JE, Killerby ME, Hsu CH, Tate JE, Kirking HL, Matanock A; COVID-19 Household Transmission Team. Comparison of Home Antigen Testing With RT-PCR and Viral Culture during the Course of SARS-CoV-2 Infection. JAMA Intern Med. 2022 Jul 1; 182(7):701-709. 34. Brümmer LE, Katzenschlager S, Gaeddert M, Erdmann C, Schmitz S, Bota M, et al. Accuracy of novel antigen rapid diagnostics for SARS-CoV-2: A living systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS Med. 2021; 18(8): e1003735. 35. Brihn A, Chang J, OYong K, et al. Diagnostic Performance of an Antigen Test with RT-PCR for the Detection of SARS-CoV-2 in a Hospital Setting - Los Angeles County, California, June-August 2020. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2021; 70(19):702-706. Published 2021 May 14.