Abstract
Introduction The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has become a major public health issue worldwide. Developing and evaluating rapid and easy-to-perform diagnostic tests is an absolute priority. The current prospective study was designed to assess diagnostic performances of an antigen-based rapid detection test (COVID-VIRO®) in a real-life setting.
Methods Two nasopharyngeal specimens of symptomatic or asymptomatic adult patients hospitalized in the Infectious Diseases Department or voluntarily accessing the COVID-19 Screening Department of the Regional Hospital of Orléans, France, were concurrently collected. COVID VIRO® diagnostic specificity and sensitivity were assessed in comparison to real-time reverse transcriptase quantitative polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR) results. A subgroup of patients underwent an additional oropharyngeal and/or a saliva swab for rapid testing.
Results 121 patients already having a confirmed infection and 127 patients having no evidence of recent or ongoing infection were enrolled, for a total of 248 couple of nasopharyngeal swab specimens. Overall COVID-VIRO® sensitivity was 96.7% (IC: 93.5%-99.9%). In asymptomatic patients, patients having symptoms for more than 4 days and those having a RT-qPCR Cycle threshold value >32, sensitivity was of 100%, 95.8% and 96.9% respectively. The concordance between RT-qPCR and COVID VIRO® rapid test was 100% for the 127 patients with no SARS-CoV-2 infection.
Conclusion COVID-VIRO® test had 100% specificity and above 95% sensitivity, better than WHO recommendations (specificity ≥97-100%, sensitivity ≥80%). These rapid tests are particularly interesting for large-scale screening in Emergency Department, low resource settings and airports.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Clinical Trial
registration in progress
Funding Statement
The sutdy was funded by the Centre Hospitalier Regional, orleans, France (public funding)
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
Approval obtained by the Regional North West Ethical comittee, France
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
data are fully avalaible by request to the corresponding author
