Abstract
Objective To investigate the performance of a rapid point-of-care antibody test, the BioMedomics COVID-19 IgM/IgG Rapid Test, in comparison with a high-quality, validated, laboratory-based platform, the Roche Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 assay.
Methods Serological testing was conducted on 708 individuals. Concordance metrics were estimated. Logistic regression was used to assess associations with seropositivity.
Results SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence was 63.4% (449/708; 95% CI 59.8%-66.9%) using the BioMedomics assay and 71.9% (509/708; 95% CI 68.5%-75.1%) using the Elecsys assay. There were 62 discordant results between the two assays. One specimen was seropositive in the BioMedomics assay, but seronegative in the Elecsys assay, while 61 specimens were seropositive in the Elecsys assay, but seronegative in the BioMedomics assay. Positive, negative, and overall percent agreements between the two assays were 88.0% (95% CI 84.9%-90.6%), 99.5% (95% CI 97.2%-99.9%), and 91.2% (95% CI 88.9%-93.1%), respectively, with a Cohen’s kappa of 0.80 (95% CI 0.77-0.83), indicating excellent agreement. Excluding specimens with lower antibody titers, the agreement improved with positive, negative, and overall percent concordance of 91.2% (95% CI 88.2%-93.6%), 99.5% (95% CI 97.2%-99.9%), and 93.9% (95% CI 91.7%-95.5%), respectively, and a Cohen’s kappa of 0.87 (95% CI 0.84-0.89). Logistic regression confirmed better agreement with higher antibody titers.
Conclusion The BioMedomics COVID-19 IgM/IgG Rapid Test demonstrated excellent performance in measuring detectable antibodies against SARS-CoV-2, supporting the utility of such rapid point-of-care serological testing to guide the public health responses and possible vaccine prioritization.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
The authors are grateful for support provided by Hamad Medical Corporation, the Ministry of Public Health, and the Biomedical Research Program and the Biostatistics, Epidemiology, and Biomathematics Research Core, both at Weill Cornell Medicine-Qatar. The statements made herein are solely the responsibility of the authors.
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:
Research methods were approved by the ethics review boards at Hamad Medical Center (HMC) and Weill Cornell Medicine-Qatar.
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
Funding: Hamad Medical Corporation, Ministry of Public Health, and the Biomedical Research Program and Biostatistics, Epidemiology, and Biomathematics Research Core, both at Weill Cornell Medicine-Qatar.
Data Availability
All relevant data are available in the main text and supplementary material.
