Abstract
Background We assessed the performance of CoronaCHEK lateral flow assay on samples from Uganda and Baltimore to determine the impact of geographic origin on assay performance.
Methods Serum samples from SARS-CoV-2 PCR+ individuals (Uganda: 78 samples from 78 individuals and Baltimore: 266 samples from 38 individuals) and from pre-pandemic individuals (Uganda 1077 and Baltimore 532) were evaluated. Prevalence ratios (PR) were calculated to identify factors associated with a false-positive test.
Results After first positive PCR in Ugandan samples the sensitivity was: 45% (95% CI 24,68) at 0-7 days; 79% (95%CI 64,91) 8-14 days; and 76% (95%CI 50,93) >15 days. In samples from Baltimore, sensitivity was: 39% (95% CI 30, 49) 0-7 days; 86% (95% CI 79,92) 8-14 days; and 100% (95% CI 89,100) 15 days post positive PCR. The specificity of 96.5% (95% CI 97.5,95.2) in Ugandan samples was significantly lower than samples from Baltimore 99.3% (95% CI 98.1,99.8), p<0.01. In Ugandan samples, individuals with a false positive result were more likely to be male (PR 2.04, 95% CI 1.03,3.69) or individuals who had a fever more than a month prior to sample acquisition (PR 2.87, 95% CI 1.12,7.35).
Conclusions Sensitivity of the CoronaCHEK was similar in samples from Uganda and Baltimore. The specificity was significantly lower in Ugandan samples than in Baltimore samples. False positive results in Ugandan samples appear to correlate with a recent history of a febrile illness, potentially indicative of a cross-reactive immune response in individuals from East Africa.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
Support was provided by the Division of Intramural Research, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), National Institutes of Health (NIH), as well as by extramural support from NIAID UM1-AI068613 for supporting R.E.F.; and NIH Center of Excellence in Influenza Research and Surveillance HHSN272201400007C to R.E.R.
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:
The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine Institutional Review Board (IRB00247886, IRB00250798, and IRB00091667); Uganda Virus Research Institute Research Ethics Committee (GC/127/20/04/773, GC/127/13/01/16); Western Institutional Review Board (200313317); Uganda National Council for Science and Technology (HS637ES).
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
Footnotes
Conflict of Interest: None to declare
Funding: Support was provided by the Division of Intramural Research, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), National Institutes of Health (NIH), as well as by extramural support from NIAID UM1-AI068613 for supporting R.E.F.; and NIH Center of Excellence in Influenza Research and Surveillance HHSN272201400007C to R.E.R.
Data Availability
Data is available upon request
