RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Diagnostic accuracy of a novel SARS-CoV-2 antigen-detecting rapid diagnostic test from standardized self-collected anterior nasal swabs
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2021.04.20.21255797
DO 10.1101/2021.04.20.21255797
A1 Osmanodja, Bilgin
A1 Budde, Klemens
A1 Zickler, Daniel
A1 Naik, Marcel G.
A1 Hofmann, Jörg
A1 Gertler, Maximilian
A1 Hülso, Claudia
A1 Rössig, Heike
A1 Horn, Philipp
A1 Seybold, Joachim
A1 Lunow, Stephanie
A1 Bothmann, Melanie
A1 Barrera-Pesek, Astrid
A1 Mayrdorfer, Manuel
YR 2021
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/04/23/2021.04.20.21255797.abstract
AB Background Antigen-detecting rapid diagnostic tests (Ag-RDT) for SARS-CoV-2 offer new opportunities for the quick and laboratory-independent identification of infected individuals for control of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Despite the potential benefits, nasopharyngeal sample collection is frequently perceived as uncomfortable by patients and requires trained healthcare personnel with protective equipment. Therefore, anterior nasal self-sampling is increasingly recognized as a valuable alternative.Methods We performed a prospective, single-center, point of care validation of an Ag-RDT using a polypropylene absorbent collector for standardized self-collected anterior nasal swabs. Real-Time Polymerase Chain Reaction (RT-PCR) from combined oropharyngeal/nasopharyngeal swabs served as a comparator. Primary endpoint was sensitivity of the standardized Ag-RDT in symptomatic patients with medium or high viral concentration (≥ 1 million RNA copies on RT-PCR for SARS-CoV-2).Results Between February 12 and March 22, 2021, 388 participants were enrolled. After exclusion of 9 patients for which no PCR result could be obtained, the novel Ag-RDT was evaluated based on 379 participants, of which 273 were symptomatic and 106 asymptomatic. In 61 samples from symptomatic patients with medium or high viral load (≥ 1 million RNA copies), the sensitivity of the standardized Ag-RDT was 96.7% (59/61; 95%CI: 88.7-99.6%) for the primary endpoint. In total, 62 positive Ag-RDT results were detected out of 70 RT-PCR positive individuals, yielding an overall sensitivity of 88.6% (95%CI: 78.7-94.9%). Specificity was 99.7% (95%CI: 98.2-100%) in 309 RT-PCR negative individuals.Conclusion Here, we present a validation of a novel Ag-RDT with a standardized sampling process for anterior nasal self-collection, which meets WHO criteria of ≥80% sensitivity and ≥97% specificity. Although less sensitive than RT-PCR, this assay could be beneficial due to its rapid results, ease of use, and suitability for standardized self-testing.(Funded by Drägerwerk AG & Co. KGaA, Lübeck, Germany; ClinicalTrials.gov number NCT04698993)Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Clinical TrialNCT04698993Funding StatementThis study was funded by Drägerwerk AG & Co. KGaA, Lübeck, Germany.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:The study protocol was approved by the ethical review committee of the federal state of Berlin. All experiments on human subjects were performed in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki, implying that all participants provided informed consent.All 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.YesAvailable data: (1) De-identified data that underlie the results in this paper. (2) Analysis code. Until 5 years after publication. Available to: researchers who provide a sound proposal and all study sites and the Sponsor agree to sharing the data. Proposals should be directed towards the corresponding author.