Skip to main content
medRxiv
  • Home
  • About
  • Submit
  • ALERTS / RSS
Advanced Search

FALSE-NEGATIVE RESULTS OF INITIAL RT-PCR ASSAYS FOR COVID-19: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW

View ORCID ProfileIngrid Arevalo-Rodriguez, Diana Buitrago-Garcia, Daniel Simancas-Racines, Paula Zambrano-Achig, Rosa Del Campo, Agustín Ciapponi, Omar Sued, Laura Martínez-García, Anne Rutjes, View ORCID ProfileNicola Low, View ORCID ProfilePatrick M. Bossuyt, Jose A Perez-Molina, Javier Zamora
doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.04.16.20066787
Ingrid Arevalo-Rodriguez
1Clinical Biostatistics Unit, Hospital Universitario Ramón y Cajal, IRYCIS, CIBER of Epidemiology and Public Health, Madrid, Spain
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Ingrid Arevalo-Rodriguez
  • For correspondence: inarev7@yahoo.com ingrid.arevalo@salud.madrid.org
Diana Buitrago-Garcia
2Institute of Social and Preventive Medicine (ISPM), University of Bern, Switzerland
3Graduate School for Health Sciences, University of Bern, Switzerland
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Daniel Simancas-Racines
4Centro de investigación en Salud Pública y Epidemiología Clínica (CISPEC). Facultad de Ciencias de la Salud “Eugenio Espejo”, Universidad UTE, Ecuador
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Paula Zambrano-Achig
5Centro de investigación en Salud Pública y Epidemiología Clínica (CISPEC). Facultad de Ciencias de la Salud “Eugenio Espejo”, Universidad UTE, Ecuador
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Rosa Del Campo
6Department of Microbiology, Ramón y Cajal University Hospital, Ramón y Cajal Health Research Institute (IRYCIS), Madrid, Spain
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Agustín Ciapponi
7Instituto de Efectividad Clínica y Sanitaria (IECS-CONICET), Buenos Aires, Argentina
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Omar Sued
8Fundación Huésped, Buenos Aires, Argentina
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Laura Martínez-García
9Department of Microbiology, Ramón y Cajal University Hospital, Ramón y Cajal Health Research Institute (IRYCIS), CIBER of Epidemiology and Public Health, Madrid, Spain
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Anne Rutjes
3Graduate School for Health Sciences, University of Bern, Switzerland
10Institute of Social and Preventive Medicine (ISPM), University of Bern, Switzerland
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Nicola Low
3Graduate School for Health Sciences, University of Bern, Switzerland
11Institute of Social and Preventive Medicine (ISPM), University of Bern, Switzerland
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Nicola Low
Patrick M. Bossuyt
12Department of Clinical Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Amsterdam University Medical Centres, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Patrick M. Bossuyt
Jose A Perez-Molina
13National Referral Centre for Tropical Diseases, Infectious Diseases Department, Hospital Universitario Ramón y Cajal, Insituto Ramón y Cajal de Investgación Sanitaria, Madrid, Spain
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Javier Zamora
14Clinical Biostatistics Unit, Hospital Universitario Ramón y Cajal, IRYCIS, CIBER of Epidemiology and Public Health, Madrid, Spain
15Barts and the London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Queen Mary University London (UK)
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Abstract
  • Full Text
  • Info/History
  • Metrics
  • Data/Code
  • Preview PDF
Loading

ABSTRACT

Background A false-negative case of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV- 2) infection is defined as a person with suspected infection and an initial negative result by reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) test, with a positive result on a subsequent test. False-negative cases have important implications for isolation and risk of transmission of infected people and for the management of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We aimed to review and critically appraise evidence about the rate of RT-PCR false-negatives at initial testing for COVID-19.

Methods We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS, as well as COVID-19 repositories including the EPPI-Centre living systematic map of evidence about COVID-19 and the Coronavirus Open Access Project living evidence database. Two authors independently screened and selected studies according to the eligibility criteria and collected data from the included studies. The risk of bias was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS-2) tool. We calculated the proportion of false-negative test results with the corresponding 95% CI using a multilevel mixed-effect logistic regression model. The certainty of the evidence about false- negative cases was rated using the GRADE approach for tests and strategies. All information in this article is current up to July 17, 2020.

Results We included 34 studies enrolling 12,057 COVID-19 confirmed cases. All studies were affected by several risks of bias and applicability concerns. The pooled estimate of false-negative proportion was highly affected by unexplained heterogeneity (tau-squared= 1.39; 90% prediction interval from 0.02 to 0.54). The certainty of the evidence was judged as very low, due to the risk of bias, indirectness, and inconsistency issues.

Conclusions There is a substantial and largely unexplained heterogeneity in the proportion of false-negative RT-PCR results. The collected evidence has several limitations, including risk of bias issues, high heterogeneity, and concerns about its applicability. Nonetheless, our findings reinforce the need for repeated testing in patients with suspicion of SARS-CoV-2 infection given that up to 54% of COVID-19 patients may have an initial false-negative RT-PCR (certainty of evidence: very low). An update of this review when additional studies become available is warranted.

Systematic review registration Protocol available on the OSF website: https://osf.io/gp38w/

Competing Interest Statement

The authors have declared no competing interest.

Clinical Protocols

https://osf.io/jserd/

Funding Statement

No external funding received

Author Declarations

All relevant ethical guidelines have been followed; any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained and details of the IRB/oversight body are included in the manuscript.

Yes

All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.

Yes

I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).

Yes

I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.

Yes

Footnotes

  • Last search performed on July 17-2020. Findings updated

Data Availability

The study protocol is available online at https://osf.io/jserd/. Most included studies are publically available. Additional data are available upon reasonable request.

https://osf.io/jserd/

Copyright 
The copyright holder for this preprint is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under a CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license.
Back to top
PreviousNext
Posted August 13, 2020.
Download PDF
Data/Code
Email

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word about medRxiv.

NOTE: Your email address is requested solely to identify you as the sender of this article.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
FALSE-NEGATIVE RESULTS OF INITIAL RT-PCR ASSAYS FOR COVID-19: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from medRxiv
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from the medRxiv website.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Share
FALSE-NEGATIVE RESULTS OF INITIAL RT-PCR ASSAYS FOR COVID-19: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW
Ingrid Arevalo-Rodriguez, Diana Buitrago-Garcia, Daniel Simancas-Racines, Paula Zambrano-Achig, Rosa Del Campo, Agustín Ciapponi, Omar Sued, Laura Martínez-García, Anne Rutjes, Nicola Low, Patrick M. Bossuyt, Jose A Perez-Molina, Javier Zamora
medRxiv 2020.04.16.20066787; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.04.16.20066787
Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
Citation Tools
FALSE-NEGATIVE RESULTS OF INITIAL RT-PCR ASSAYS FOR COVID-19: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW
Ingrid Arevalo-Rodriguez, Diana Buitrago-Garcia, Daniel Simancas-Racines, Paula Zambrano-Achig, Rosa Del Campo, Agustín Ciapponi, Omar Sued, Laura Martínez-García, Anne Rutjes, Nicola Low, Patrick M. Bossuyt, Jose A Perez-Molina, Javier Zamora
medRxiv 2020.04.16.20066787; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.04.16.20066787

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Subject Area

  • Infectious Diseases (except HIV/AIDS)
Subject Areas
All Articles
  • Addiction Medicine (70)
  • Allergy and Immunology (168)
  • Anesthesia (51)
  • Cardiovascular Medicine (453)
  • Dentistry and Oral Medicine (83)
  • Dermatology (55)
  • Emergency Medicine (158)
  • Endocrinology (including Diabetes Mellitus and Metabolic Disease) (191)
  • Epidemiology (5273)
  • Forensic Medicine (3)
  • Gastroenterology (196)
  • Genetic and Genomic Medicine (759)
  • Geriatric Medicine (80)
  • Health Economics (213)
  • Health Informatics (700)
  • Health Policy (361)
  • Health Systems and Quality Improvement (224)
  • Hematology (99)
  • HIV/AIDS (164)
  • Infectious Diseases (except HIV/AIDS) (5895)
  • Intensive Care and Critical Care Medicine (363)
  • Medical Education (105)
  • Medical Ethics (25)
  • Nephrology (83)
  • Neurology (767)
  • Nursing (43)
  • Nutrition (131)
  • Obstetrics and Gynecology (144)
  • Occupational and Environmental Health (234)
  • Oncology (480)
  • Ophthalmology (152)
  • Orthopedics (39)
  • Otolaryngology (95)
  • Pain Medicine (39)
  • Palliative Medicine (20)
  • Pathology (141)
  • Pediatrics (223)
  • Pharmacology and Therapeutics (136)
  • Primary Care Research (99)
  • Psychiatry and Clinical Psychology (865)
  • Public and Global Health (2023)
  • Radiology and Imaging (349)
  • Rehabilitation Medicine and Physical Therapy (158)
  • Respiratory Medicine (287)
  • Rheumatology (94)
  • Sexual and Reproductive Health (74)
  • Sports Medicine (77)
  • Surgery (110)
  • Toxicology (25)
  • Transplantation (29)
  • Urology (39)