Literature DB >> 34370269

Multicenter Evaluation of a Fully Automated High-Throughput SARS-CoV-2 Antigen Immunoassay.

Dominik Nörz1, Flaminia Olearo1, Stojan Perisic2, Matthias F Bauer3, Elena Riester4, Tanja Schneider5, Kathrin Schönfeld5, Tina Laengin5, Marc Lütgehetmann6.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Molecular testing for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) continues to suffer from delays and shortages. Antigen tests have recently emerged as a viable alternative to detect patients with high viral loads, associated with elevated risk of transmission. While rapid lateral flow tests greatly improved accessibility of SARS-CoV-2 detection in critical areas, their manual nature limits scalability and suitability for large-scale testing schemes. The Elecsys® SARS-CoV-2 Antigen assay allows antigen immunoassays to be carried out on fully automated high-throughput serology platforms.
METHODS: A total of 3139 nasopharyngeal and oropharyngeal swabs were collected at 3 different testing sites in Germany. Swab samples were pre-characterized by reverse transcription real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR) and consecutively subjected to the antigen immunoassay on either the cobas e 411 or cobas e 801 analyzer.
RESULTS: Of the tested respiratory samples, 392 were PCR positive for SARS-CoV-2 RNA. Median concentration was 2.95 × 104 (interquartile range [IQR] 5.1 × 102-3.5 × 106) copies/ml. Overall sensitivity and specificity of the antigen immunoassay were 60.2% (95% confidence interval [CI] 55.2-65.1) and 99.9% (95% CI 99.6-100.0), respectively. A 93.7% (95% CI 89.7-96.5) sensitivity was achieved at a viral RNA concentration ≥ 104 copies/ml (~ cycle threshold [Ct] value < 29.9).
CONCLUSION: The Elecsys SARS-CoV-2 Antigen assay reliably detected patient samples with viral loads ≥ 10,000 copies/ml. It thus represents a viable high-throughput alternative for screening of patients or in situations where PCR testing is not readily available.
© 2021. The Author(s).

Entities:  

Keywords:  Antigen immunoassay; High-throughput platform; SARS-CoV-2

Year:  2021        PMID: 34370269     DOI: 10.1007/s40121-021-00510-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Infect Dis Ther        ISSN: 2193-6382


  11 in total

1.  Rethinking Covid-19 Test Sensitivity - A Strategy for Containment.

Authors:  Michael J Mina; Roy Parker; Daniel B Larremore
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2020-09-30       Impact factor: 91.245

2.  Diagnostic tests. 1: Sensitivity and specificity.

Authors:  D G Altman; J M Bland
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1994-06-11

3.  Performance Evaluation of Serial SARS-CoV-2 Rapid Antigen Testing During a Nursing Home Outbreak.

Authors:  Susannah L McKay; Farrell A Tobolowsky; Erin D Moritz; Kelly M Hatfield; Amelia Bhatnagar; Stephen P LaVoie; David A Jackson; K Danielle Lecy; Jonathan Bryant-Genevier; Davina Campbell; Brandi Freeman; Sarah E Gilbert; Jennifer M Folster; Magdalena Medrzycki; Patricia L Shewmaker; Bettina Bankamp; Kay W Radford; Raydel Anderson; Michael D Bowen; Jeanne Negley; Sujan C Reddy; John A Jernigan; Allison C Brown; L Clifford McDonald; Preeta K Kutty
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2021-04-27       Impact factor: 25.391

4.  Viral Cultures for Coronavirus Disease 2019 Infectivity Assessment: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Tom Jefferson; Elisabeth A Spencer; Jon Brassey; Carl Heneghan
Journal:  Clin Infect Dis       Date:  2021-12-06       Impact factor: 9.079

5.  Clinical Evaluation of Roche SD Biosensor Rapid Antigen Test for SARS-CoV-2 in Municipal Health Service Testing Site, the Netherlands.

Authors:  Zsὁfia Iglὁi; Jans Velzing; Janko van Beek; David van de Vijver; Georgina Aron; Roel Ensing; Kimberley Benschop; Wanda Han; Timo Boelsums; Marion Koopmans; Corine Geurtsvankessel; Richard Molenkamp
Journal:  Emerg Infect Dis       Date:  2021-03-16       Impact factor: 6.883

6.  Comparison of seven commercial SARS-CoV-2 rapid point-of-care antigen tests: a single-centre laboratory evaluation study.

Authors:  Victor M Corman; Verena Claudia Haage; Tobias Bleicker; Marie Luisa Schmidt; Barbara Mühlemann; Marta Zuchowski; Wendy K Jo; Patricia Tscheak; Elisabeth Möncke-Buchner; Marcel A Müller; Andi Krumbholz; Jan Felix Drexler; Christian Drosten
Journal:  Lancet Microbe       Date:  2021-04-07

7.  Handling and accuracy of four rapid antigen tests for the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 compared to RT-qPCR.

Authors:  Flaminia Olearo; Dominik Nörz; Fabian Heinrich; Jan Peter Sutter; Kevin Roedl; Alexander Schultze; Julian Schulze Zur Wiesch; Platon Braun; Lisa Oestereich; Benno Kreuels; Dominic Wichmann; Martin Aepfelbacher; Susanne Pfefferle; Marc Lütgehetmann
Journal:  J Clin Virol       Date:  2021-03-03       Impact factor: 3.168

8.  The Abbott PanBio WHO emergency use listed, rapid, antigen-detecting point-of-care diagnostic test for SARS-CoV-2-Evaluation of the accuracy and ease-of-use.

Authors:  Lisa J Krüger; Mary Gaeddert; Frank Tobian; Federica Lainati; Claudius Gottschalk; Julian A F Klein; Paul Schnitzler; Hans-Georg Kräusslich; Olga Nikolai; Andreas K Lindner; Frank P Mockenhaupt; Joachim Seybold; Victor M Corman; Christian Drosten; Nira R Pollock; Britta Knorr; Andreas Welker; Margaretha de Vos; Jilian A Sacks; Claudia M Denkinger
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2021-05-27       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Low performance of rapid antigen detection test as frontline testing for COVID-19 diagnosis.

Authors:  Anaïs Scohy; Ahalieyah Anantharajah; Monique Bodéus; Benoît Kabamba-Mukadi; Alexia Verroken; Hector Rodriguez-Villalobos
Journal:  J Clin Virol       Date:  2020-05-21       Impact factor: 3.168

10.  Pushing beyond specifications: Evaluation of linearity and clinical performance of the cobas 6800/8800 SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR assay for reliable quantification in blood and other materials outside recommendations.

Authors:  Dominik Nörz; André Frontzek; Ulrich Eigner; Lisa Oestereich; Dominic Wichmann; Stefan Kluge; Nicole Fischer; Martin Aepfelbacher; Susanne Pfefferle; Marc Lütgehetmann
Journal:  J Clin Virol       Date:  2020-09-23       Impact factor: 3.168

View more
  4 in total

1.  Diagnostic Accuracy of Rapid Antigen Tests for COVID-19 Detection: A Systematic Review With Meta-analysis.

Authors:  Maniya Arshadi; Fatemeh Fardsanei; Behnaz Deihim; Zahra Farshadzadeh; Farhad Nikkhahi; Farima Khalili; Giovanni Sotgiu; Amir Hashem Shahidi Bonjar; Rosella Centis; Giovanni Battista Migliori; Mohammad Javad Nasiri; Mehdi Mirsaeidi
Journal:  Front Med (Lausanne)       Date:  2022-04-07

2.  A method comparison study of the high throughput automated HISCL® SARS-CoV-2 antigen assay using nasopharyngeal swab samples from symptomatic and asymptomatic subjects against conventional RT-PCR.

Authors:  Joachim Linssen; Claire Schapendonk; Marion Münster; Paul Daemen; Janette Rahamat-Langendoen; Heiman Wertheim
Journal:  J Med Virol       Date:  2022-03-08       Impact factor: 20.693

3.  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 4.  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
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.