RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Impact of COVID-19 pre-test probability on positive predictive value of high cycle threshold SARS-CoV-2 real-time reverse transcription PCR test results
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2021.03.02.21252768
DO 10.1101/2021.03.02.21252768
A1 Gubbay, Jonathan B.
A1 Rilkoff, Heather
A1 Kristjanson, Heather L.
A1 Forbes, Jessica D.
A1 Murti, Michelle
A1 Eshaghi, AliReza
A1 Broukhanski, George
A1 Corbeil, Antoine
A1 Fittipaldi, Nahuel
A1 Hopkins, Jessica P.
A1 Kristjanson, Erik
A1 Kus, Julianne V.
A1 Macdonald, Liane
A1 Majury, Anna
A1 Mallo, Gustavo V
A1 Mazzulli, Tony
A1 Melano, Roberto G.
A1 Olsha, Romy
A1 Perusini, Stephen J.
A1 Tran, Vanessa
A1 Allen, Vanessa G
A1 Patel, Samir N
YR 2021
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/03/03/2021.03.02.21252768.abstract
AB Background Performance characteristics of SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid detection assays are understudied within contexts of low pre-test probability, including screening asymptomatic persons without epidemiological links to confirmed cases, or asymptomatic surveillance testing. SARS-CoV-2 detection without symptoms may represent resolved infection with persistent RNA shedding, presymptomatic or asymptomatic infection, or a false positive test. This study assessed clinical specificity of SARS-CoV-2 real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR) assays by retesting positive specimens from five pre-test probability groups ranging from high to low with an alternate assay.Materials and Methods A total of 122 rRT-PCR positive specimens collected from unique patients between March and July 2020 were retested using a laboratory-developed nested RT-PCR assay targeting the RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp) gene followed by Sanger sequencing.Results Significantly less positive results in the lowest pre-test probability group (facilities with institution-wide screening having ≤ 3 positive asymptomatic cases) were reproduced with the nested RdRp gene RT-PCR assay than in all other groups combined (5/32, 15·6% vs 61/90, 68%; p <0·0001), and in each subgroup with higher pre-test probability (individual subgroup range 50·0% to 85·0%).Conclusions A higher proportion of false-positive test results are likely with lower pre-test probability. Positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR results should be interpreted within the context of patient history, clinical setting, known exposure, and estimated community disease prevalence. Large-scale SARS-CoV-2 screening testing initiatives among low pre-test probability populations should be evaluated thoroughly prior to implementation given the risk of false positives and consequent potential for harm at the individual and population level.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementThis work was funded by Public Health Ontario.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:The Public Health Ontario Ethics Review Board determined that this project is exempt from research ethics committee review, as it describes analyses that were completed at PHO Laboratory as part of routine clinical respiratory testing during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in Ontario and are therefore considered public health practice, not researchAll necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI 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).YesI 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.YesData requests can be made to the corresponding author for institutional review.