Abstract
Background Rapid COVID-19 diagnosis in hospital is essential for patient management and identification of infectious patients to limit the potential for nosocomial transmission. The diagnosis is complicated by 30-50% of COVID-19 hospital admissions with negative nose/throat swabs for SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid, frequently after the first week of illness when SARS-CoV-2 antibody responses become detectable. We assessed the diagnostic accuracy of combined rapid antibody point of care (POC) and nucleic acid assays for suspected COVID-19 disease in the emergency department.
Methods We developed (i) an in vitro neutralization assay using a lentivirus expressing a genome encoding luciferase and pseudotyped with spike protein and (ii) an ELISA test to detect IgG antibodies to nucleocapsid (N) and spike (S) proteins from SARS-CoV-2. We tested two promising candidate lateral flow rapid fingerprick test with bands for IgG and IgM. We then prospectively recruited participants with suspected moderate to severe COVID-19 and tested for SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid in a combined nasal/throat swab using the standard laboratory RT-PCR and a validated rapid nucleic acid test. Additionally, serum collected at admission was retrospectively tested by in vitro neutralization, ELISA and the candidate POC antibody tests. We determined the sensitivity and specificity of the individual and combined rapid POC diagnostic tests against a composite ‘gold’ standard of neutralisation and the standard laboratory RT-PCR.
Results 45 participants had specimens tested for nucleic acid in nose/throat swabs as well as stored sera for antibodies. Serum neutralisation assay, SARS-CoV-2 Spike IgG ELISA and the POC antibody test results were concordant. Using the composite gold standard, prevalence of COVID-19 disease was 53.3% (24/45). Median age was 73.5 (IQR 54.0-86.5) years in those with COVID-19 disease by our gold standard and 63.0 (IQR 41.0-72.0) years in those without disease. Median duration of symptoms was 7 days (IQR 1-8) in those with infection. The overall sensitivity of rapid NAAT diagnosis was 79.2% (95CI 57.8-92.9%). Sensitivity and specificity of the combined rapid POC diagnostic tests reached 100% (95CI 85.8-100) and 94.7% (95CI 74.0-99.0) overall.
Conclusions Dual point of care SARS-CoV-2 testing can significantly improve diagnostic sensitivity, whilst maintaining high specificity. Rapid combined tests have the potential to transform our management of COVID-19, including inflammatory manifestations where nucleic acid test results are negative. A rapid combined approach will also aid recruitment into clinical trials and in prescribing therapeutics, particularly where potentially harmful immune modulators (including steroids) are used.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Clinical Trial
NCT04326387
Funding Statement
RKG is supported by a Wellcome Trust Senior Fellowship in Clinical Science (WT108082AIA). DAC is supported by a Wellcome PhD training Fellowship. This research was supported by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre and the Cambridge Clinical Trials Unit (CCTU). LCJ is supported by the MRC (UK; U105181010) and a Wellcome Investigator Award. JAGB is supported by the European Research Council (ERC) under the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme (ERC-CoG-648432 MEMBRANEFUSION), and the Medical Research Council (MC_UP_1201/16).
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
COVIDx, NCT04326387 was approved by the East of England Essex Research Ethics Committee (REC ref: 20/EE/0109). Serum samples were obtained from patients attending Addenbrookes Hospital with a suspected or confirmed diagnosis of COVID19. Ethical approval was obtained from the East of England Cambridge Central Research Ethics Committee REC ref 17/EE/0025.
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
Data Availability
Data are available on request from the corresponding author
