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

Head-to-head comparison of SARS-CoV-2 antigen-detecting rapid test with professional-collected nasal versus nasopharyngeal swab

Andreas K. Lindner, Olga Nikolai, Chiara Rohardt, Susen Burock, Claudia Hülso, Alisa Bölke, Maximilian Gertler, Lisa J. Krüger, Mary Gaeddert, Frank Tobian, Federica Lainati, Joachim Seybold, Terry C. Jones, Jörg Hofmann, Jilian A. Sacks, View ORCID ProfileFrank P. Mockenhaupt, Claudia M. Denkinger
doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.12.03.20243725
Andreas K. Lindner
1Charité – Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, and Berlin Institute of Health; Institute of Tropical Medicine and International Health, Berlin, Germany
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Olga Nikolai
1Charité – Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, and Berlin Institute of Health; Institute of Tropical Medicine and International Health, Berlin, Germany
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Chiara Rohardt
1Charité – Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, and Berlin Institute of Health; Institute of Tropical Medicine and International Health, Berlin, Germany
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Susen Burock
2Charité – Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, and Berlin Institute of Health; Charité Comprehensive Cancer Center
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Claudia Hülso
1Charité – Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, and Berlin Institute of Health; Institute of Tropical Medicine and International Health, Berlin, Germany
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Alisa Bölke
1Charité – Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, and Berlin Institute of Health; Institute of Tropical Medicine and International Health, Berlin, Germany
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Maximilian Gertler
1Charité – Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, and Berlin Institute of Health; Institute of Tropical Medicine and International Health, Berlin, Germany
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Lisa J. Krüger
3Division of Clinical Tropical Medicine, Center of Infectious Diseases, Heidelberg University Hospital, Germany
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Mary Gaeddert
3Division of Clinical Tropical Medicine, Center of Infectious Diseases, Heidelberg University Hospital, Germany
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Frank Tobian
3Division of Clinical Tropical Medicine, Center of Infectious Diseases, Heidelberg University Hospital, Germany
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Federica Lainati
3Division of Clinical Tropical Medicine, Center of Infectious Diseases, Heidelberg University Hospital, Germany
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Joachim Seybold
4Charité – Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, and Berlin Institute of Health; Medical Directorate, Berlin, Germany
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Terry C. Jones
5Charité – Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, and Berlin Institute of Health; Institute of Virology, Berlin, Germany
6German Centre for Infection Research (DZIF), partner site Charité, 10117 Berlin, Germany
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Jörg Hofmann
7Labor Berlin - Charité Vivantes GmbH, Berlin, Germany
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Jilian A. Sacks
8Foundation for Innovative New Diagnostics, Geneva, Switzerland
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Frank P. Mockenhaupt
1Charité – Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, and Berlin Institute of Health; Institute of Tropical Medicine and International Health, Berlin, Germany
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Frank P. Mockenhaupt
Claudia M. Denkinger
3Division of Clinical Tropical Medicine, Center of Infectious Diseases, Heidelberg University Hospital, Germany
9German Centre for Infection Research (DZIF), partner site Heidelberg, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: claudia.denkinger@uni-heidelberg.de
  • Abstract
  • Full Text
  • Info/History
  • Metrics
  • Data/Code
  • Preview PDF
Loading

Abstract

Background Nasopharyngeal (NP) swab samples for antigen-detecting rapid diagnostic tests (Ag-RDTs) require qualified healthcare professionals and are frequently perceived as uncomfortable by patients.

Methods We performed a manufacturer-independent, prospective diagnostic accuracy study, comparing professional-collected nasal mid-turbinate (NMT) to nasopharyngeal swab, using the test kits of a WHO-listed SARS-CoV-2 Ag-RDT (STANDARD Q COVID-19 Ag Test, SD Biosensor), which is also being distributed by Roche. Individuals with high suspicion for COVID-19 infection were tested. The reference standard was RT-PCR using a combined oro-/nasopharyngeal swab sample. Percent positive and negative agreement, as well as sensitivity and specificity were calculated.

Results Among the 179 participants, 41 (22.9%) tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 by RT-PCR. The positive percent agreement of the two different sampling techniques for the Ag-RDT was 93.5% (CI 79.3-98.2). The negative percent agreement was 95.9% (CI 91.4-98.1). The Ag-RDT with NMT-sampling showed a sensitivity of 80.5% (33/41 PCR positives detected; CI 66.0-89.8) and specificity of 98.6% (CI 94.9-99.6) compared to RT-PCR. The sensitivity with NP-sampling was 73.2% (30/41 PCR positives detected; CI 58.1-84.3) and specificity was 99.3% (CI 96.0-100). In patients with high viral load (>7.0 log10 SARS-CoV-2 RNA copies/swab), the sensitivity of the Ag-RDT with NMT-sampling was 100% and 94.7% with NP-sampling.

Conclusion This study demonstrates that sensitivity of a WHO-listed SARS-CoV-2 Ag-RDT using a professional nasal-sampling kit is at least equal to that of the NP-sampling kit, although confidence intervals overlap. Of note, differences in the IFUs of the test procedures could have contributed to different sensitivities. NMT-sampling can be performed with less training, reduces patient discomfort, and it enables scaling of antigen testing strategies. Additional studies of patient self-sampling should be considered to further facilitate the scaling-up of Ag-RDT testing.

Competing Interest Statement

The authors have declared no competing interest.

Clinical Trial

DRKS00021220 - German Clinical Trial Registry

Funding Statement

The study was supported by FIND, Heidelberg University Hospital and Charité University Hospital internal funds, as well as a grant of the Ministry of Science, Research and the Arts of Baden-Württemberg, Germany. FIND provided input on the study design, and data analysis in collaboration with the rest of the study team.

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:

The study protocol was approved by the ethical review committee at Heidelberg University Hospital for the study site in Berlin (registration number S-180/2020).

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

  • We want to point out one edit: The term nasal sampling is often not used uniformly but can be differentiated in anterior nasal sampling and nasal mid-turbinate. This distinction is now used consistently by CDC and FDA, so we have adapted our terminology in the manuscript accordingly and name our sampling method as nasal mid-turbinate (NMT).

Data availability

All raw data and analysis code are available upon a request to the corresponding author.

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 January 11, 2021.
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.
Head-to-head comparison of SARS-CoV-2 antigen-detecting rapid test with professional-collected nasal versus nasopharyngeal swab
(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
Head-to-head comparison of SARS-CoV-2 antigen-detecting rapid test with professional-collected nasal versus nasopharyngeal swab
Andreas K. Lindner, Olga Nikolai, Chiara Rohardt, Susen Burock, Claudia Hülso, Alisa Bölke, Maximilian Gertler, Lisa J. Krüger, Mary Gaeddert, Frank Tobian, Federica Lainati, Joachim Seybold, Terry C. Jones, Jörg Hofmann, Jilian A. Sacks, Frank P. Mockenhaupt, Claudia M. Denkinger
medRxiv 2020.12.03.20243725; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.12.03.20243725
Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Google logo LinkedIn logo Mendeley logo
Citation Tools
Head-to-head comparison of SARS-CoV-2 antigen-detecting rapid test with professional-collected nasal versus nasopharyngeal swab
Andreas K. Lindner, Olga Nikolai, Chiara Rohardt, Susen Burock, Claudia Hülso, Alisa Bölke, Maximilian Gertler, Lisa J. Krüger, Mary Gaeddert, Frank Tobian, Federica Lainati, Joachim Seybold, Terry C. Jones, Jörg Hofmann, Jilian A. Sacks, Frank P. Mockenhaupt, Claudia M. Denkinger
medRxiv 2020.12.03.20243725; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.12.03.20243725

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 (161)
  • Allergy and Immunology (414)
  • Anesthesia (90)
  • Cardiovascular Medicine (857)
  • Dentistry and Oral Medicine (159)
  • Dermatology (97)
  • Emergency Medicine (248)
  • Endocrinology (including Diabetes Mellitus and Metabolic Disease) (393)
  • Epidemiology (8557)
  • Forensic Medicine (4)
  • Gastroenterology (383)
  • Genetic and Genomic Medicine (1749)
  • Geriatric Medicine (167)
  • Health Economics (372)
  • Health Informatics (1239)
  • Health Policy (620)
  • Health Systems and Quality Improvement (467)
  • Hematology (196)
  • HIV/AIDS (372)
  • Infectious Diseases (except HIV/AIDS) (10292)
  • Intensive Care and Critical Care Medicine (553)
  • Medical Education (192)
  • Medical Ethics (51)
  • Nephrology (211)
  • Neurology (1676)
  • Nursing (97)
  • Nutrition (249)
  • Obstetrics and Gynecology (326)
  • Occupational and Environmental Health (450)
  • Oncology (928)
  • Ophthalmology (263)
  • Orthopedics (101)
  • Otolaryngology (172)
  • Pain Medicine (112)
  • Palliative Medicine (40)
  • Pathology (252)
  • Pediatrics (534)
  • Pharmacology and Therapeutics (248)
  • Primary Care Research (207)
  • Psychiatry and Clinical Psychology (1765)
  • Public and Global Health (3835)
  • Radiology and Imaging (623)
  • Rehabilitation Medicine and Physical Therapy (320)
  • Respiratory Medicine (520)
  • Rheumatology (208)
  • Sexual and Reproductive Health (166)
  • Sports Medicine (158)
  • Surgery (190)
  • Toxicology (36)
  • Transplantation (101)
  • Urology (76)