Literature DB >> 33849953

Comparison of the Quantitative DiaSorin Liaison Antigen Test to Reverse Transcription-PCR for the Diagnosis of COVID-19 in Symptomatic and Asymptomatic Outpatients.

Stefanie Lefever1, Christophe Indevuyst2, Lize Cuypers1, Klaas Dewaele1, Nicolas Yin3, Frédéric Cotton4, Elizaveta Padalko5, Matthijs Oyaert6, Julie Descy7, Etienne Cavalier8, Marc Van Ranst1,9, Emmanuel André1,9, Katrien Lagrou1,9, Pieter Vermeersch1,10.   

Abstract

We evaluated the quantitative DiaSorin Liaison severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) antigen test in symptomatic and asymptomatic individuals consulting their general practitioners (GPs) during a period of stable intense virus circulation (213/100,000 habitants per day). Leftover reverse transcription-PCR (RT-PCR) positive (n = 204) and negative (n = 210) nasopharyngeal samples were randomly selected among fresh routine samples collected from patients consulting their GPs. Samples were tested on Liaison XL according to the manufacturer's instructions. Equivocal results were considered negative. The overall sensitivity and specificity of the Liaison antigen test compared to RT-PCR were 65.7% (95% confidence interval [CI], 58.9% to 71.9%) and 100% (CI, 97.8% to 100%). Sensitivity in samples with viral loads of ≥105, ≥104, and ≥103 copies/ml were 100% (CI, 96.3% to 100.0%), 96.5% (CI, 91.8% to 98.7%), and 87.4% (CI, 81.3% to 91.5%), respectively. All samples with ≤103 copies/ml were antigen negative. The ratio of antigen concentration to viral load in samples with ≥103 copies/ml was comparable in symptomatic and asymptomatic individuals (P = 0.58). The proportion of RT-PCR-positive participants with a high viral load (≥105 copies/ml) was not significantly higher in symptomatic than in asymptomatic participants (63.9% [CI, 54.9% to 72.0%] versus 51.9% [CI, 41.1% to 62.6%]; P = 0.11), but the proportion of participants with a low viral load (<103 copies/ml) was significantly higher in asymptomatic than in symptomatic RT-PCR-positive participants (35.4% [CI, 25.8% to 46.4%] versus 14.3% [CI, 9.0% to 21.8%]; P < 0.01). Sensitivity and specificity in samples with a viral load of ≥104 copies/ml were 96.5% and 100%. The correlation of antigen concentration with viral load was comparable in symptomatic and asymptomatic individuals.

Entities:  

Keywords:  COVID-19 testing; SARS-CoV-2; ambulatory care; antigen; diagnosis; sensitivity and specificity

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 33849953      PMCID: PMC8218764          DOI: 10.1128/JCM.00374-21

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


  23 in total

1.  Virological assessment of hospitalized patients with COVID-2019.

Authors:  Roman Wölfel; Victor M Corman; Wolfgang Guggemos; Michael Seilmaier; Sabine Zange; Marcel A Müller; Daniela Niemeyer; Terry C Jones; Patrick Vollmar; Camilla Rothe; Michael Hoelscher; Tobias Bleicker; Sebastian Brünink; Julia Schneider; Rosina Ehmann; Katrin Zwirglmaier; Christian Drosten; Clemens Wendtner
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2020-04-01       Impact factor: 49.962

2.  Viral RNA load as determined by cell culture as a management tool for discharge of SARS-CoV-2 patients from infectious disease wards.

Authors:  Bernard La Scola; Marion Le Bideau; Julien Andreani; Van Thuan Hoang; Clio Grimaldier; Philippe Colson; Philippe Gautret; Didier Raoult
Journal:  Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis       Date:  2020-04-27       Impact factor: 3.267

3.  Panbio antigen rapid test is reliable to diagnose SARS-CoV-2 infection in the first 7 days after the onset of symptoms.

Authors:  Manuel Linares; Ramón Pérez-Tanoira; Ana Carrero; Juan Romanyk; Felipe Pérez-García; Peña Gómez-Herruz; Teresa Arroyo; Juan Cuadros
Journal:  J Clin Virol       Date:  2020-10-16       Impact factor: 3.168

4.  Evaluation of Abbott BinaxNOW Rapid Antigen Test for SARS-CoV-2 Infection at Two Community-Based Testing Sites - Pima County, Arizona, November 3-17, 2020.

Authors:  Jessica L Prince-Guerra; Olivia Almendares; Leisha D Nolen; Jayleen K L Gunn; Ariella P Dale; Sean A Buono; Molly Deutsch-Feldman; Suganthi Suppiah; LiJuan Hao; Yan Zeng; Valerie A Stevens; Kristen Knipe; Justine Pompey; Christine Atherstone; David P Bui; Tracy Powell; Azaibi Tamin; Jennifer L Harcourt; Patricia L Shewmaker; Magdalena Medrzycki; Phili Wong; Shilpi Jain; Alexandra Tejada-Strop; Shannon Rogers; Brian Emery; Houping Wang; Marla Petway; Caitlin Bohannon; Jennifer M Folster; Adam MacNeil; Reynolds Salerno; Wendi Kuhnert-Tallman; Jacqueline E Tate; Natalie J Thornburg; Hannah L Kirking; Khalilullah Sheiban; Julie Kudrna; Theresa Cullen; Kenneth K Komatsu; Julie M Villanueva; Dale A Rose; John C Neatherlin; Mark Anderson; Paul A Rota; Margaret A Honein; William A Bower
Journal:  MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep       Date:  2021-01-22       Impact factor: 17.586

5.  Duration and key determinants of infectious virus shedding in hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19).

Authors:  Jeroen J A van Kampen; David A M C van de Vijver; Pieter L A Fraaij; Bart L Haagmans; Mart M Lamers; Nisreen Okba; Johannes P C van den Akker; Henrik Endeman; Diederik A M P J Gommers; Jan J Cornelissen; Rogier A S Hoek; Menno M van der Eerden; Dennis A Hesselink; Herold J Metselaar; Annelies Verbon; Jurriaan E M de Steenwinkel; Georgina I Aron; Eric C M van Gorp; Sander van Boheemen; Jolanda C Voermans; Charles A B Boucher; Richard Molenkamp; Marion P G Koopmans; Corine Geurtsvankessel; Annemiek A van der Eijk
Journal:  Nat Commun       Date:  2021-01-11       Impact factor: 14.919

6.  SARS-CoV-2, SARS-CoV, and MERS-CoV viral load dynamics, duration of viral shedding, and infectiousness: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Muge Cevik; Matthew Tate; Ollie Lloyd; Alberto Enrico Maraolo; Jenna Schafers; Antonia Ho
Journal:  Lancet Microbe       Date:  2020-11-19

7.  Upper respiratory viral load in asymptomatic individuals and mildly symptomatic patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Authors:  Sang Hyun Ra; Joon Seo Lim; Gwang-Un Kim; Min Jae Kim; Jiwon Jung; Sung-Han Kim
Journal:  Thorax       Date:  2020-09-22       Impact factor: 9.139

8.  Comparison of automated SARS-CoV-2 antigen test for COVID-19 infection with quantitative RT-PCR using 313 nasopharyngeal swabs, including from seven serially followed patients.

Authors:  Yosuke Hirotsu; Makoto Maejima; Masahiro Shibusawa; Yuki Nagakubo; Kazuhiro Hosaka; Kenji Amemiya; Hitomi Sueki; Miyoko Hayakawa; Hitoshi Mochizuki; Toshiharu Tsutsui; Yumiko Kakizaki; Yoshihiro Miyashita; Shintaro Yagi; Satoshi Kojima; Masao Omata
Journal:  Int J Infect Dis       Date:  2020-08-12       Impact factor: 3.623

9.  Clinical Evaluation of BD Veritor SARS-CoV-2 Point-of-Care Test Performance Compared to PCR-Based Testing and versus the Sofia 2 SARS Antigen Point-of-Care Test.

Authors:  Stephen Young; Stephanie N Taylor; Catherine L Cammarata; Katey G Varnado; Celine Roger-Dalbert; Amanda Montano; Christen Griego-Fullbright; Cameron Burgard; Catherine Fernandez; Karen Eckert; Jeffrey C Andrews; Huimiao Ren; Joseph Allen; Ronald Ackerman; Charles K Cooper
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2020-12-17       Impact factor: 5.948

10.  Antibody response against SARS-CoV-2 spike protein and nucleoprotein evaluated by four automated immunoassays and three ELISAs.

Authors:  Jan Van Elslande; Bram Decru; Stijn Jonckheere; Eric Van Wijngaerden; Els Houben; Patricia Vandecandelaere; Christophe Indevuyst; Melissa Depypere; Stefanie Desmet; Emmanuel André; Marc Van Ranst; Katrien Lagrou; Pieter Vermeersch
Journal:  Clin Microbiol Infect       Date:  2020-07-31       Impact factor: 13.310

View more
  13 in total

Review 1.  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

Review 2.  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

3.  Clinical Assessment of the DiaSorin LIAISON SARS-CoV-2 Ag Chemiluminescence Immunoassay.

Authors:  Gian Luca Salvagno; Gianluca Gianfilippi; Giacomo Fiorio; Laura Pighi; Simone De Nitto; Brandon M Henry; Giuseppe Lippi
Journal:  EJIFCC       Date:  2021-06-29

4.  Comparison of four commercial, automated antigen tests to detect SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern.

Authors:  Andreas Osterman; Maximilian Iglhaut; Andreas Lehner; Patricia Späth; Marcel Stern; Hanna Autenrieth; Maximilian Muenchhoff; Alexander Graf; Stefan Krebs; Helmut Blum; Armin Baiker; Natascha Grzimek-Koschewa; Ulrike Protzer; Lars Kaderali; Hanna-Mari Baldauf; Oliver T Keppler
Journal:  Med Microbiol Immunol       Date:  2021-08-20       Impact factor: 3.402

5.  COVID-19 Infections in Cancer Patients Were Frequently Asymptomatic: Description From a French Prospective Multicenter Cohort (PAPESCO-19).

Authors:  Ke Zhou; Jean-Luc Raoul; Audrey Blanc-Lapierre; Valérie Seegers; Michèle Boisdron-Celle; Marianne Bourdon; Hakim Mahammedi; Aurélien Lambert; Camille Moreau-Bachelard; Mario Campone; Thierry Conroy; Frédérique Penault-Llorca; Martine M Bellanger; Frédéric Bigot
Journal:  Clin Med Insights Oncol       Date:  2022-04-18

6.  Analytical Performance of Quantitative DiaSorin Liaison SARS-COV-2 Antigen Test for the Asymptomatic Population.

Authors:  Gema Fernández-Rivas; Jaume Barallat; Victoria Gonzalez; Silvia Martinez; Antoni E Bordoy; Laura Jimenez; Cristina Casañ; Ignacio Blanco
Journal:  Front Public Health       Date:  2022-01-07

7.  Validation of a rapid antigen test as a screening tool for SARS-CoV-2 infection in asymptomatic populations. Sensitivity, specificity and predictive values.

Authors:  Alejandro Fernandez-Montero; Josepmaria Argemi; José Antonio Rodríguez; Arturo H Ariño; Laura Moreno-Galarraga
Journal:  EClinicalMedicine       Date:  2021-06-09

8.  Accuracy of novel antigen rapid diagnostics for SARS-CoV-2: A living systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Lukas E Brümmer; Stephan Katzenschlager; Mary Gaeddert; Christian Erdmann; Stephani Schmitz; Marc Bota; Maurizio Grilli; Jan Larmann; Markus A Weigand; Nira R Pollock; Aurélien Macé; Sergio Carmona; Stefano Ongarello; Jilian A Sacks; Claudia M Denkinger
Journal:  PLoS Med       Date:  2021-08-12       Impact factor: 11.069

Review 9.  Performance of Rapid Antigen Tests for COVID-19 Diagnosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Muhammad Fazli Khalid; Kasturi Selvam; Alfeq Jazree Nashru Jeffry; Mohamad Fazrul Salmi; Mohamad Ahmad Najib; Mohd Noor Norhayati; Ismail Aziah
Journal:  Diagnostics (Basel)       Date:  2022-01-04

10.  Saliva-based COVID-19 detection: A rapid antigen test of SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid protein using an electrical-double-layer gated field-effect transistor-based biosensing system.

Authors:  Pin-Hsuan Chen; Chih-Cheng Huang; Chia-Che Wu; Po-Hsuan Chen; Adarsh Tripathi; Yu-Lin Wang
Journal:  Sens Actuators B Chem       Date:  2022-01-14       Impact factor: 7.460

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.