TY - JOUR T1 - The sensitivity of SARS-CoV-2 antigen tests in the view of large-scale testing JF - medRxiv DO - 10.1101/2020.11.23.20237198 SP - 2020.11.23.20237198 AU - Pavel Drevinek AU - Jakub Hurych AU - Zdenek Kepka AU - Ales Briksi AU - Michal Kulich AU - Miroslav Zajac AU - Petr Hubacek Y1 - 2020/01/01 UR - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/11/24/2020.11.23.20237198.abstract N2 - Objectives Antigen tests have recently emerged as an interesting alternative to SARS-CoV-2 diagnostic PCR, thought to be valuable especially for the screening of bigger communities. To check appropriateness of the antigen based testing, we determined sensitivity of two point-of-care antigen tests when applied to a cohort of COVID-19 symptomatic, COVID-19 asymptomatic and healthy persons.Methods We examined nasopharyngeal swabs with antigen test 1 (Panbio Covid-19 Ag Rapid Test, Abbott) and antigen test 2 (Standard F Covid-19 Ag FIA, SD Biosensor). An additional nasopharyngeal and oropharyngeal swab of the same individual was checked with PCR (Allplex SARS-nCoV-2, Seegene). Within a 4-day period in October 2020, we collected specimens from 591 subjects. Of them, 290 had COVID-19 associated symptoms.Results While PCR positivity was detected in 223 cases, antigen test 1 and antigen test 2 were found positive in 148 (sensitivity 0.664, 95% CI 0.599 - 0.722) and 141 (sensitivity 0.623, 95% CI 0.558 - 0.684) patients, respectively. When only symptomatic patients were analysed, sensitivity increased to 0.738 (95% CI 0.667 - 0.799) for the antigen test 1 and to 0.685 (95% CI 0.611 - 0.750) for the antigen test 2. The substantial drop in sensitivity to 12.9% (95% CI 0.067 - 0.234) was observed for samples with the PCR threshold cycle above > 30.Conclusions Low sensitivity of antigen tests leads to the considerable risk of false negativity. It is advisable to implement repeated testing with high enough frequency if the antigen test is used as a frontline screening tool.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementSupported by the Ministry of Health of the Czech Republic - conceptual development of research organization Motol University Hospital, FNM.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:Ethics Committee of the Motol University HospitalAll necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI 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).YesI 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.YesAll data are included in the manuscript. ER -