Literature DB >> 33622768

Performance and Implementation Evaluation of the Abbott BinaxNOW Rapid Antigen Test in a High-Throughput Drive-Through Community Testing Site in Massachusetts.

Nira R Pollock1, Jesica R Jacobs2,3, Kristine Tran2, Amber E Cranston2, Sita Smith2, Claire Y O'Kane2, Tyler J Roady2, Anne Moran4, Alison Scarry4, Melissa Carroll4, Leila Volinsky4, Gloria Perez4, Pinal Patel2, Stacey Gabriel5, Niall J Lennon5, Lawrence C Madoff2,6, Catherine Brown2, Sandra C Smole7.   

Abstract

Rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) for SARS-CoV-2 antigens (Ag) that can be performed at point of care (POC) can supplement molecular testing and help mitigate the COVID-19 pandemic. Deployment of an Ag RDT requires an understanding of its operational and performance characteristics under real-world conditions and in relevant subpopulations. We evaluated the Abbott BinaxNOW COVID-19 Ag card in a high-throughput, drive-through, free community testing site in Massachusetts using anterior nasal (AN) swab reverse transcriptase PCR (RT-PCR) for clinical testing. Individuals presenting for molecular testing in two of seven lanes were offered the opportunity to also receive BinaxNOW testing. Dual AN swabs were collected from symptomatic and asymptomatic children (≤18 years of age) and adults. BinaxNOW testing was performed in a testing pod with temperature/humidity monitoring. One individual performed testing and official result reporting for each test, but most tests had a second independent reading to assess interoperator agreement. Positive BinaxNOW results were scored as faint, medium, or strong. Positive BinaxNOW results were reported to patients by phone, and they were instructed to isolate pending RT-PCR results. The paired RT-PCR result was the reference for sensitivity and specificity calculations. Of 2,482 participants, 1,380 adults and 928 children had paired RT-PCR/BinaxNOW results and complete symptom data. In this study, 974/1,380 (71%) adults and 829/928 (89%) children were asymptomatic. BinaxNOW had 96.5% (95% confidence interval [CI], 90.0 to 99.3) sensitivity and 100% (95% CI, 98.6 to 100.0) specificity in adults within 7 days of symptoms and 84.6% (95% CI, 65.1 to 95.6) sensitivity and 100% (95% CI, 94.5 to 100.0) specificity in children within 7 days of symptoms. Sensitivity and specificity in asymptomatic adults were 70.2% (95% CI, 56.6 to 81.6) and 99.6% (95% CI, 98.9 to 99.9), respectively, and in asymptomatic children, they were 65.4% (95% CI, 55.6 to 74.4) and 99.0% (95% CI, 98.0 to 99.6), respectively. By cycle threshold (CT ) value cutoff, sensitivity in all subgroups combined (n = 292 RT-PCR-positive individuals) was 99.3% with CT values of ≤25, 95.8% with CT values of ≤30, and 81.2% with CT values of ≤35. Twelve false-positive BinaxNOW results (out of 2,308 tests) were observed; in all 12, the test bands were faint but otherwise normal and were noted by both readers. One invalid BinaxNOW result was identified. Interoperator agreement (positive versus negative BinaxNOW result) was 100% (n = 2,230/2,230 double reads). Each operator was able to process 20 RDTs per hour. In a separate set of 30 specimens (from individuals with symptoms ≤7 days) run at temperatures below the manufacturer's recommended range (46 to 58.5°F), sensitivity was 66.7% and specificity 95.2%. BinaxNOW had very high specificity in both adults and children and very high sensitivity in newly symptomatic adults. Overall, 95.8% sensitivity was observed with CT values of ≤30. These data support public health recommendations for use of the BinaxNOW test in adults with symptoms for ≤7 days without RT-PCR confirmation. Excellent interoperator agreement indicates that an individual can perform and read the BinaxNOW test alone. A skilled laboratorian can perform and read 20 tests per hour. Careful attention to temperature is critical.
Copyright © 2021 American Society for Microbiology.

Entities:  

Keywords:  COVID-19; SARS-CoV-2; antigen; diagnostic; point of care

Year:  2021        PMID: 33622768     DOI: 10.1128/JCM.00083-21

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Microbiol        ISSN: 0095-1137            Impact factor:   5.948


  47 in total

1.  Implementation of a COVID-19 Screening Testing Program in a Rural, Tribal Nation: Experience of the San Carlos Apache Tribe, January-February 2021.

Authors:  Natsai Zhou Chidavaenzi; Nickolas Agathis; Yvonne Lees; Heidi Stevens; James Clark; David Reede; Amber Kunkel; S Arunmozhi Balajee
Journal:  Public Health Rep       Date:  2022-01-13       Impact factor: 2.792

Review 2.  Rapid, point-of-care antigen tests for diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection.

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

3.  Rapid Antigen Test Sensitivity for Asymptomatic COVID-19 Screening.

Authors:  Alyssa M Indelicato; Zacharia H Mohamed; Mantosh J Dewan; Christopher P Morley
Journal:  PRiMER       Date:  2022-06-22

4.  Simplified Cas13-based assays for the fast identification of SARS-CoV-2 and its variants.

Authors:  Pardis C Sabeti; Cameron Myhrvold; Jon Arizti-Sanz; A'Doriann Bradley; Yibin B Zhang; Chloe K Boehm; Catherine A Freije; Michelle E Grunberg; Tinna-Solveig F Kosoko-Thoroddsen; Nicole L Welch; Priya P Pillai; Sreekar Mantena; Gaeun Kim; Jessica N Uwanibe; Oluwagboadurami G John; Philomena E Eromon; Gregory Kocher; Robin Gross; Justin S Lee; Lisa E Hensley; Bronwyn L MacInnis; Jeremy Johnson; Michael Springer; Christian T Happi
Journal:  Nat Biomed Eng       Date:  2022-05-30       Impact factor: 29.234

5.  Comparative analyses of eighteen rapid antigen tests and RT-PCR for COVID-19 quarantine and surveillance-based isolation.

Authors:  Chad R Wells; Abhishek Pandey; Seyed M Moghadas; Burton H Singer; Gary Krieger; Richard J L Heron; David E Turner; Justin P Abshire; Kimberly M Phillips; A Michael Donoghue; Alison P Galvani; Jeffrey P Townsend
Journal:  Commun Med (Lond)       Date:  2022-07-09

6.  Clinical Performance of Three Commercial SARS-CoV-2 Rapid Antigen Tests for Community-Dwelling Individuals in a Tropical Setting.

Authors:  Diana Morales-Jadán; Carolina Viteri-Dávila; Bernardo Castro-Rodriguez; Alexander Paolo Vallejo-Janeta; Ismar A Rivera-Olivero; Franklin Perez; Miguel Angel Garcia-Bereguiain
Journal:  Front Cell Infect Microbiol       Date:  2022-07-05       Impact factor: 6.073

Review 7.  Performance of Antigen Detection Tests for SARS-CoV-2: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Anastasia Tapari; Georgia G Braliou; Maria Papaefthimiou; Helen Mavriki; Panagiota I Kontou; Georgios K Nikolopoulos; Pantelis G Bagos
Journal:  Diagnostics (Basel)       Date:  2022-06-04

8.  Rapid, point-of-care antigen and molecular-based tests for diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Authors:  Jacqueline Dinnes; Jonathan J Deeks; Sarah Berhane; Melissa Taylor; Ada Adriano; Clare Davenport; Sabine Dittrich; Devy Emperador; Yemisi Takwoingi; Jane Cunningham; Sophie Beese; Julie Domen; Janine Dretzke; Lavinia Ferrante di Ruffano; Isobel M Harris; Malcolm J Price; Sian Taylor-Phillips; Lotty Hooft; Mariska Mg Leeflang; Matthew Df McInnes; René Spijker; Ann Van den Bruel
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2021-03-24

9.  Surveillance testing for SARS-COV-2 infection in an asymptomatic athlete population: a prospective cohort study with 123 362 tests and 23 463 paired RT-PCR/antigen samples.

Authors:  Kimberly Harmon; Anabelle M de St Maurice; Adam C Brady; Sankar Swaminathan; Doug F Aukerman; Miguel A Rueda; Kim Terrell; Randall P Cohen; Seth C Gamradt; Sunday D Henry; Lindsay M Huston; David R McAllister; Kenneth M McCarty; Anthony N Pass; Stephen R Paul; David J Petron; Stephanie A Kliethermes
Journal:  BMJ Open Sport Exerc Med       Date:  2021-06-18

10.  Detection of SARS-CoV-2 at the point of care.

Authors:  Michael J Loeffelholz; Yi-Wei Tang
Journal:  Bioanalysis       Date:  2021-07-22       Impact factor: 2.681

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.