RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Evaluation of real-life use of Point-Of-Care Rapid Antigen TEsting for SARS-CoV-2 in schools for outbreak control (EPOCRATES)
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2021.10.13.21264960
DO 10.1101/2021.10.13.21264960
A1 Ana C. Blanchard
A1 Marc Desforges
A1 Annie-Claude Labbé
A1 Cat Tuong Nguyen
A1 Yves Petit
A1 Dominic Besner
A1 Kate Zinszer
A1 Olivier Séguin
A1 Zineb Laghdir
A1 Kelsey Adams
A1 Marie-Ève Benoit
A1 Geneviève Leduc
A1 Jean Longtin
A1 Ioannis Ragoussis
A1 David L. Buckeridge
A1 Caroline Quach
YR 2021
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/10/14/2021.10.13.21264960.abstract
AB We evaluated the use of rapid antigen detection tests (RADT) for the diagnosis of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection in school settings to determine RADT’s performance characteristics compared to PCR.Methods We did a real-world, prospective observational cohort study where recruited high-school students and staff from two high-schools in Montreal (Canada) were followed from January 25th to June 10th, 2021. Twenty-five percent of asymptomatic participants were tested weekly by RADT (nasal) and PCR (gargle). Class contacts of a case were tested. Symptomatic participants were tested by RADT (nasal) and PCR (nasal and gargle). The number of cases/outbreak and number of outbreaks were compared to other high schools in the same area.Results Overall, 2,099 students and 286 school staff members consented to participate. The overall RADT’s specificity varied from 99.8 to 100%, with a lower sensitivity, varying from 28.6% in asymptomatic to 83.3% in symptomatic participants. The number of outbreaks was not different in the 2 participating schools compared to other high schools in the same area, but included a greater proportion of asymptomatic cases. Returning students to school after a 7-day quarantine, with a negative PCR on D6-7 after exposure, did not lead to subsequent outbreaks, as shown by serial testing. Of cases for whom the source was known, 37 of 57 (72.5%) were secondary to household transmission, 13 (25%) to intra-school transmission and one to community contacts between students in the same school.Conclusion RADT did not perform well as a screening tool in asymptomatic individuals. Reinforcing policies for symptom screening when entering schools and testing symptomatic individuals with RADT on the spot may avoid subsequent significant exposures in class.Evidence before this study Rapid antigen detection tests (RADT) have been used for years to diagnose respiratory pathogens, such as influenza and respiratory syncytial virus. These tests detect the presence of a specific viral antigen and are usually performed on nasopharyngeal or nasal specimens. RADT are relatively inexpensive and can be used at the point-of-care. Their performance characteristics vary, but they usually have high specificity and moderate sensitivity compared with PCR. For SARS-CoV-2, RADT’s specificity has been quite high (99.5%), but with sensitivity ranging from 28.9% to 98.3%.Added value of this study This study determined the sensitivity and specificity of RADT against PCR for the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 in a real-life setting in high school students. The test performed well, in terms of specificity, but had a sensitivity that was as low as 28.6% in asymptomatic individuals to 83.3% in symptomatic individuals. The longitudinal aspect of the study also allowed to determine the impact of RADT on school outbreaks.Implication of all available evidence RADT does not perform well as a screening tool for asymptomatic individuals. Reinforcing policies for symptom screening when entering schools and testing symptomatic individuals with RADT on the spot may avoid subsequent significant exposures in class.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementThis study was funded by the Quebec Ministry of Health and Social Services, to whom regular reports of the study progress were submitted. The study sponsor did not have a role in study design, in interpretation of data, writing of the report or decision to submit the paper for publication.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:This project was approved by the CHU Ste-Justine Research Ethics Board (#MP-21-2021-3271). Written invitation letters to participate in the study were sent by schools direction to parents and staff explaining the study objectives, methods and expected impacts. Online informed parental consent, as well as assent, was required for all students. Parents who preferred to keep their children home for 14 days in case of a class contact could do so. Tests results were communicated to parents and students (if ≥14 years) by the school (via email), as they became available.I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.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 produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors