| Literature DB >> 35652635 |
Rafael Mello Galliez1,2, Larissa Bomfim3, Debora Souza Faffe1,4, Amilcar Tanuri1,3, Diana Mariani3, Isabela de Carvalho Leitão1,4, Anna Carla Pinto Castiñeiras1,5, Cassia Cristina Alves Gonçalves3, Bianca Ortiz da Silva1,6, Pedro Henrique Cardoso7, Monica Barcelos Arruda7, Patricia Alvarez7, Rodrigo Brindeiro3,7, Victor Akira Ota1, Débora Gomes Marins Rodrigues1, Luciana Jesus da Costa1,8, Orlando da Costa Ferreira1,3, Terezinha Marta Pereira Pinto Castiñeiras1,2.
Abstract
Community testing is a crucial tool for the early identification of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and transmission control. The emergence of the highly mutated Omicron variant (B.1.1.529) raised concerns about its primary site of replication, impacting sample collection and its detectability by rapid antigen tests. We tested the performance of the Panbio antigen rapid diagnostic test (Ag-RDT) using nasal and oral specimens for COVID-19 diagnosis in 192 symptomatic individuals, with quantitative reverse transcription-PCR (RT-qPCR) of nasopharyngeal samples as a control. Variant of concern (VOC) investigation was performed with the 4Plex SARS-CoV-2 screening kit. The SARS-CoV-2 positivity rate was 66.2%, with 99% of the positive samples showing an amplification profile consistent with that of the Omicron variant. Nasal Ag-RDT showed higher sensitivity (89%) than oral (12.6%) Ag-RDT. Our data showed good performance of the Ag-RDT in a pandemic scenario dominated by the Omicron VOC. Furthermore, our data also demonstrated that the Panbio COVID-19 antigen rapid diagnostic test does not provide good sensitivity with oral swabs for Omicron Ag-RDT detection. IMPORTANCE This study showed that the antigen rapid test for COVID19 worked fine using nasal swabs when it was utilized in patients infected with the Omicron variant, showing a concordance with PCR in 93% of patients tested. The nasal swab yielded more reliable results than the oral swab when an antigen rapid diagnosis test (the Panbio COVID-19 antigen rapid diagnostic test) was used in patients infected with the Omicron variant.Entities:
Keywords: Ag-RDT; Omicron; rapid test
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35652635 PMCID: PMC9241948 DOI: 10.1128/spectrum.01250-22
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Microbiol Spectr ISSN: 2165-0497
Cohort general characteristics
| Characteristic | Result for characteristic |
|---|---|
| No. of patients | 192 |
| Age in yr, avg (range) | 39 (21–74) |
| Gender, no. (%) | |
| Female | 126 (65.6) |
| Male | 66 (34.4) |
| DSSO, mode (range) | 3 (0–7) |
| ≤3 | 127 (66.1) |
| 4–7 | 65 (33.9) |
| Vaccination, no. (%) | |
| 1 dose | 4 (2.1) |
| 2 doses | 59 (30.7) |
| ≥3 doses | 129 (67.2) |
| Follow-up, no. (%) | 32 (16.7) |
| Follow-up DSSO, mode (range) | 10 (2–12) |
| Positive results, no. (%) | |
| RT-qPCR | 127 (66.2) |
| Ag_Nasal | 113 (58.9) |
| Ag_Oral | 16 (8.6) |
DSSO, days since symptom onset.
Sensitivity and specificity of Ag-RDT in relation to SARS-CoV-2 RT-qPCR result
| Test result | No. with RT-qPCR result | % sensitivity (95% CI) | % specificity (95% CI) | % Positive predictive value (95% CI) | % Negative predictive value (95% CI) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Positive | Negative | Total | |||||
| Ag-RDT | |||||||
| Nasal | |||||||
| Positive | 113 | 0 | 113 | 89.0 (82.4–93.3) | 100.0 (94.4–100.0) | 100.0 (96.7–100.0) | 82.3 (72.4–89.1) |
| Negative | 14 | 65 | 79 | ||||
| Total | 127 | 65 | 192 | ||||
| Oral | |||||||
| Positive | 16 | 0 | 16 | 12.6 (7.9–19.5) | 100.0 (94.4–100.0) | 100.0 (80.6–100.0) | 36.9 (30.2–44.3) |
| Negative | 111 | 65 | 176 | ||||
| Total | 127 | 65 | 192 | ||||
FIG 1Concordance among SARS-CoV-2 RT-qPCR and Ag-RDT results from nasal (Ag_Nasal) and oral (Ag_Oral) specimens from 192 mildly symptomatic patients analyzed up to 7 days since symptom onset.
FIG 2Violin plots showing the median, variability, and probability density of cycle threshold (Ct) values of N1 target amplification obtained by RT-qPCR from nasopharyngeal samples (RT-qPCR) and Ag-RDT leftovers (LO) from nasal and oral specimens in 192 mildly symptomatic patients tested up to 7 days since symptom onset. Medians were significantly different among groups (Kruskal-Wallis nonparametric test, P = 0.0009).
FIG 3Total number of results obtained by RT-qPCR and Ag-RDT from nasal and oral specimens at the first and second visits in the follow-up group. A total of 32 patients with a positive SARS-CoV-2 RT-qPCR result were included for follow-up analysis until 7 days after the first test.
FIG 4Concordance among SARS-CoV-2 RT-qPCR and Ag-RDT results from nasal (Ag_Nasal) and oral (Ag_Oral) specimens at the first and second visits in the follow-up group. A total of 32 patients with a positive SARS-CoV-2 RT-qPCR result were included for follow-up analysis until 7 days after the first test.