RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Clinical and experimental factors that affect the reported performance characteristics of rapid testing for SARS-CoV-2
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2021.05.20.21257181
DO 10.1101/2021.05.20.21257181
A1 Parvu, Valentin
A1 Gary, Devin S.
A1 Mann, Joseph
A1 Lin, Yu-Chih
A1 Mills, Dorsey
A1 Cooper, Lauren
A1 Andrews, Jeffrey C.
A1 Manabe, Yukari C.
A1 Pekosz, Andrew
A1 Cooper, Charles K.
YR 2021
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/05/22/2021.05.20.21257181.abstract
AB Tests that detect the presence of SARS-CoV-2 antigen in clinical specimens from the upper respiratory tract can provide a rapid means of COVID-19 disease diagnosis and help identify individuals that may be infectious and should isolate to prevent SARS-CoV-2 transmission. This systematic review assesses the diagnostic accuracy of SARS-CoV-2 antigen detection in COVID-19 symptomatic and asymptomatic individuals compared to RT-qPCR, and summarizes antigen test sensitivity using meta-regression. In total, 83 studies were included that compared SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen lateral flow testing (RALFT) to RT-qPCR for SARS-CoV-2. Generally, the quality of the evaluated studies was inconsistent, nevertheless, the overall sensitivity for RALFT was determined to be 75.0% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 71.0-78.0). Additionally, RALFT sensitivity was found to be higher for symptomatic versus asymptomatic individuals and was higher for a symptomatic population within 7 days from symptom onset (DSO) compared to a population with extended days of symptoms. Viral load was found to be the most important factor for determining SARS-CoV-2 antigen test sensitivity. Other design factors, such as specimen storage and anatomical collection type, also affect the performance of RAFLT. RALFT and RT-qPCR testing both achieve high sensitivity when compared to SARS-CoV-2 viral culture.Competing Interest StatementVP, DSG, YCL, DM, LC, JM, JCA, and CKC are employees of Becton, Dickinson and Company AP--None YM--None Funding StatementThis study was funded by Becton, Dickinson and Company; BD Life Sciences--Integrated Diagnostic Solutions. Non-BD employee authors received research funds to support their work for this study.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:This is a meta-analysis and is exempt from IRB review.All 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 are available upon request.