Importance: As self-collected home antigen tests become widely available, a better understanding of their performance during the course of SARS-CoV-2 infection is needed. Objective: To evaluate the diagnostic performance of home antigen tests compared with reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) and viral culture by days from illness onset, as well as user acceptability. Design, Setting, and Participants: This prospective cohort study was conducted from January to May 2021 in San Diego County, California, and metropolitan Denver, Colorado. The convenience sample included adults and children with RT-PCR-confirmed infection who used self-collected home antigen tests for 15 days and underwent at least 1 nasopharyngeal swab for RT-PCR, viral culture, and sequencing. Exposures: SARS-CoV-2 infection. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the daily sensitivity of home antigen tests to detect RT-PCR-confirmed cases. Secondary outcomes included the daily percentage of antigen test, RT-PCR, and viral culture results that were positive, and antigen test sensitivity compared with same-day RT-PCR and cultures. Antigen test use errors and acceptability were assessed for a subset of participants. Results: This study enrolled 225 persons with RT-PCR-confirmed infection (median [range] age, 29 [1-83] years; 117 female participants [52%]; 10 [4%] Asian, 6 [3%] Black or African American, 50 [22%] Hispanic or Latino, 3 [1%] Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, 145 [64%] White, and 11 [5%] multiracial individuals) who completed 3044 antigen tests and 642 nasopharyngeal swabs. Antigen test sensitivity was 50% (95% CI, 45%-55%) during the infectious period, 64% (95% CI, 56%-70%) compared with same-day RT-PCR, and 84% (95% CI, 75%-90%) compared with same-day cultures. Antigen test sensitivity peaked 4 days after illness onset at 77% (95% CI, 69%-83%). Antigen test sensitivity improved with a second antigen test 1 to 2 days later, particularly early in the infection. Six days after illness onset, antigen test result positivity was 61% (95% CI, 53%-68%). Almost all (216 [96%]) surveyed individuals reported that they would be more likely to get tested for SARS-CoV-2 infection if home antigen tests were available over the counter. Conclusions and Relevance: The results of this cohort study of home antigen tests suggest that sensitivity for SARS-CoV-2 was moderate compared with RT-PCR and high compared with viral culture. The results also suggest that symptomatic individuals with an initial negative home antigen test result for SARS-CoV-2 infection should test again 1 to 2 days later because test sensitivity peaked several days after illness onset and improved with repeated testing.
Importance: As self-collected home antigen tests become widely available, a better understanding of their performance during the course of SARS-CoV-2 infection is needed. Objective: To evaluate the diagnostic performance of home antigen tests compared with reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) and viral culture by days from illness onset, as well as user acceptability. Design, Setting, and Participants: This prospective cohort study was conducted from January to May 2021 in San Diego County, California, and metropolitan Denver, Colorado. The convenience sample included adults and children with RT-PCR-confirmed infection who used self-collected home antigen tests for 15 days and underwent at least 1 nasopharyngeal swab for RT-PCR, viral culture, and sequencing. Exposures: SARS-CoV-2 infection. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the daily sensitivity of home antigen tests to detect RT-PCR-confirmed cases. Secondary outcomes included the daily percentage of antigen test, RT-PCR, and viral culture results that were positive, and antigen test sensitivity compared with same-day RT-PCR and cultures. Antigen test use errors and acceptability were assessed for a subset of participants. Results: This study enrolled 225 persons with RT-PCR-confirmed infection (median [range] age, 29 [1-83] years; 117 female participants [52%]; 10 [4%] Asian, 6 [3%] Black or African American, 50 [22%] Hispanic or Latino, 3 [1%] Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, 145 [64%] White, and 11 [5%] multiracial individuals) who completed 3044 antigen tests and 642 nasopharyngeal swabs. Antigen test sensitivity was 50% (95% CI, 45%-55%) during the infectious period, 64% (95% CI, 56%-70%) compared with same-day RT-PCR, and 84% (95% CI, 75%-90%) compared with same-day cultures. Antigen test sensitivity peaked 4 days after illness onset at 77% (95% CI, 69%-83%). Antigen test sensitivity improved with a second antigen test 1 to 2 days later, particularly early in the infection. Six days after illness onset, antigen test result positivity was 61% (95% CI, 53%-68%). Almost all (216 [96%]) surveyed individuals reported that they would be more likely to get tested for SARS-CoV-2 infection if home antigen tests were available over the counter. Conclusions and Relevance: The results of this cohort study of home antigen tests suggest that sensitivity for SARS-CoV-2 was moderate compared with RT-PCR and high compared with viral culture. The results also suggest that symptomatic individuals with an initial negative home antigen test result for SARS-CoV-2 infection should test again 1 to 2 days later because test sensitivity peaked several days after illness onset and improved with repeated testing.
Authors: Erik von Elm; Douglas G Altman; Matthias Egger; Stuart J Pocock; Peter C Gøtzsche; Jan P Vandenbroucke Journal: Lancet Date: 2007-10-20 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Clinton R Paden; Ying Tao; Krista Queen; Jing Zhang; Yan Li; Anna Uehara; Suxiang Tong Journal: Emerg Infect Dis Date: 2020-07-01 Impact factor: 6.883
Authors: Anika Singanayagam; Seran Hakki; Jake Dunning; Kieran J Madon; Michael A Crone; Aleksandra Koycheva; Nieves Derqui-Fernandez; Jack L Barnett; Michael G Whitfield; Robert Varro; Andre Charlett; Rhia Kundu; Joe Fenn; Jessica Cutajar; Valerie Quinn; Emily Conibear; Wendy Barclay; Paul S Freemont; Graham P Taylor; Shazaad Ahmad; Maria Zambon; Neil M Ferguson; Ajit Lalvani Journal: Lancet Infect Dis Date: 2021-10-29 Impact factor: 25.071
Authors: Sue Mallett; A Joy Allen; Sara Graziadio; Stuart A Taylor; Naomi S Sakai; Kile Green; Jana Suklan; Chris Hyde; Bethany Shinkins; Zhivko Zhelev; Jaime Peters; Philip J Turner; Nia W Roberts; Lavinia Ferrante di Ruffano; Robert Wolff; Penny Whiting; Amanda Winter; Gauraang Bhatnagar; Brian D Nicholson; Steve Halligan Journal: BMC Med Date: 2020-11-04 Impact factor: 8.775
Authors: Marie E Killerby; Mohammad Ata Ur Rasheed; Azaibi Tamin; Jennifer L Harcourt; Glen R Abedi; Xiaoyan Lu; Stephanie Kujawski; Melisa M Shah; Hannah L Kirking; Jeremy A W Gold; Phillip P Salvatore; Melissa M Coughlin; Brett Whitaker; Jacqueline E Tate; John T Watson; Stephen Lindstrom; Aron J Hall; Alicia M Fry; Susan I Gerber; Claire M Midgley; Natalie J Thornburg Journal: J Infect Dis Date: 2021-03-07 Impact factor: 5.226
Authors: Tim Fischer; Yassir El Baz; Giulia Scanferla; Nicole Graf; Frederike Waldeck; Gian-Reto Kleger; Thomas Frauenfelder; Jens Bremerich; Sabine Schmidt Kobbe; Jean-Luc Pagani; Sebastian Schindera; Anna Conen; Simon Wildermuth; Sebastian Leschka; Carol Strahm; Stephan Waelti; Tobias Johannes Dietrich; Werner C Albrich Journal: Eur J Radiol Open Date: 2022-06-24
Authors: Greta M Massetti; Brendan R Jackson; John T Brooks; Cria G Perrine; Erica Reott; Aron J Hall; Debra Lubar; Ian T Williams; Matthew D Ritchey; Pragna Patel; Leandris C Liburd; Barbara E Mahon Journal: MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep Date: 2022-08-19 Impact factor: 35.301