Andrew Pekosz1,2, Valentin Parvu3, Maggie Li1, Jeffrey C Andrews3, Yukari C Manabe1,4, Salma Kodsi3, Devin S Gary3, Celine Roger-Dalbert3, Jeffry Leitch3, Charles K Cooper3. 1. W. Harry Feinstone Department of Molecular Microbiology and Immunology, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, USA. 2. Department of Emergency Medicine, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, USA. 3. Becton, Dickinson and Company, BD Life Sciences-Integrated Diagnostic Solutions, Sparks, Maryland, USA. 4. Department of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Individuals can test positive for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) by molecular assays following the resolution of their clinical disease. Recent studies indicate that SARS-CoV-2 antigen-based tests are likely to be positive early in the disease course, when there is an increased likelihood of high levels of infectious virus. METHODS: Upper respiratory specimens from 251 participants with coronavirus disease 2019 symptoms (≤7 days from symptom onset) were prospectively collected and tested with a lateral flow antigen test and a real-time polymerase chain reaction (rt-PCR) assay for detection of SARS-CoV-2. Specimens from a subset of the study specimens were utilized to determine the presence of infectious virus in the VeroE6TMPRSS2 cell culture model. RESULTS: The antigen test demonstrated a higher positive predictive value (90%) than rt-PCR (70%) when compared to culture-positive results. The positive percentage agreement for detection of infectious virus for the antigen test was similar to rt-PCR when compared to culture results. CONCLUSIONS: The correlation between SARS-CoV-2 antigen and SARS-CoV-2 culture positivity represents a significant advancement in determining the risk for potential transmissibility beyond that which can be achieved by detection of SARS-CoV-2 genomic RNA. SARS-CoV-2 antigen testing can facilitate low-cost, scalable, and rapid time-to-result, while providing good risk determination of those who are likely harboring infectious virus, compared to rt-PCR.
BACKGROUND: Individuals can test positive for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) by molecular assays following the resolution of their clinical disease. Recent studies indicate that SARS-CoV-2 antigen-based tests are likely to be positive early in the disease course, when there is an increased likelihood of high levels of infectious virus. METHODS: Upper respiratory specimens from 251 participants with coronavirus disease 2019 symptoms (≤7 days from symptom onset) were prospectively collected and tested with a lateral flow antigen test and a real-time polymerase chain reaction (rt-PCR) assay for detection of SARS-CoV-2. Specimens from a subset of the study specimens were utilized to determine the presence of infectious virus in the VeroE6TMPRSS2 cell culture model. RESULTS: The antigen test demonstrated a higher positive predictive value (90%) than rt-PCR (70%) when compared to culture-positive results. The positive percentage agreement for detection of infectious virus for the antigen test was similar to rt-PCR when compared to culture results. CONCLUSIONS: The correlation between SARS-CoV-2 antigen and SARS-CoV-2 culture positivity represents a significant advancement in determining the risk for potential transmissibility beyond that which can be achieved by detection of SARS-CoV-2 genomic RNA. SARS-CoV-2 antigen testing can facilitate low-cost, scalable, and rapid time-to-result, while providing good risk determination of those who are likely harboring infectious virus, compared to rt-PCR.
Authors: Jacqueline Steinlin-Schopfer; Maria Teresa Barbani; Richard Kamgang; Martina Zwahlen; Franziska Suter-Riniker; Ronald Dijkman Journal: J Clin Virol Plus Date: 2021-05-09
Authors: Laura Ford; Melissa J Whaley; Melisa M Shah; Phillip P Salvatore; Hannah E Segaloff; Augustina Delaney; Dustin W Currie; Lauren Boyle-Estheimer; Michelle O'Hegarty; Clint N Morgan; Jennifer Meece; Lynn Ivacic; Natalie J Thornburg; Azaibi Tamin; Jennifer L Harcourt; Jennifer M Folster; Magdalena Medrzycki; Shilpi Jain; Phili Wong; Kimberly Goffard; Douglas Gieryn; Juliana Kahrs; Kimberly Langolf; Tara Zochert; Jacqueline E Tate; Christopher H Hsu; Hannah L Kirking Journal: J Pediatric Infect Dis Soc Date: 2021-12-31 Impact factor: 3.164
Authors: Jacqueline Dinnes; Pawana Sharma; Sarah Berhane; Susanna S van Wyk; Nicholas Nyaaba; Julie Domen; Melissa Taylor; Jane Cunningham; Clare Davenport; Sabine Dittrich; Devy Emperador; Lotty Hooft; Mariska Mg Leeflang; Matthew Df McInnes; René Spijker; Jan Y Verbakel; Yemisi Takwoingi; Sian Taylor-Phillips; Ann Van den Bruel; Jonathan J Deeks Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2022-07-22
Authors: Hui Chen; Zhao Li; Sheng Feng; Melissa Richard-Greenblatt; Emily Hutson; Stefen Andrianus; Laurel J Glaser; Kyle G Rodino; Jianing Qian; Dinesh Jayaraman; Ronald G Collman; Abigail Glascock; Frederic D Bushman; Jae Seung Lee; Sara Cherry; Alejandra Fausto; Susan R Weiss; Hyun Koo; Patricia M Corby; Alfonso Oceguera; Una O'Doherty; Alfred L Garfall; Dan T Vogl; Edward A Stadtmauer; Ping Wang Journal: Clin Chem Date: 2021-12-30 Impact factor: 8.327
Authors: Roberto Verna; Walter Alallon; Masami Murakami; Catherine P M Hayward; Abdel Halim Harrath; Saleh H Alwasel; Nairo M Sumita; Ozkan Alatas; Valeria Fedeli; Praveen Sharma; Andrea Fuso; Daniela Maria Capuano; Maria Capalbo; Antonio Angeloni; Mariano Bizzarri Journal: Life (Basel) Date: 2021-07-06