RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Limit of Detection for Rapid Antigen Testing of the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron Variant
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2022.01.28.22269968
DO 10.1101/2022.01.28.22269968
A1 Stanley, Sydney
A1 Hamel, Donald J.
A1 Wolf, Ian D.
A1 Riedel, Stefan
A1 Dutta, Sanjucta
A1 Cheng, Annie
A1 Kirby, James E.
A1 Kanki, Phyllis J.
YR 2022
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/01/30/2022.01.28.22269968.abstract
AB There has been debate in the literature about the ability of antigen tests to detect the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant including indication on the US Food and Drug administration website that antigen tests may have lower sensitivity for the Omicron variant without provision of data or the potential scale of the issue (see https://www.fda.gov/medical-devices/coronavirus-covid-19-and-medical-devices/sars-cov-2-viral-mutations-impact-covid-19-tests-omicronvariantimpact, accessed 1/27/2022). Here we determined the limit of detection (LoD) for the Omicron variant compared with the WA1 strain used for LoD studies described in the Instructions for Use for all Emergency Use Authorization (EUA)-approved antigen tests. Using live virus (to avoid artifactual findings potentially obtained with gamma-irradiated or heat-killed virus) quantified by plaque forming units (PFU), we examined the analytical sensitivity of three antigen tests widely used in the United States: the Abbott Binax Now, the AccessBio CareStart, and LumiraDx antigen tests. We found that the 95% detection threshold (LoD) for antigen tests was at least as good for Omicron as for the WA1 strain. Furthermore, the relationship of genome copies to plaque forming units for Omicron and WA1 overlap. Therefore, the LoD equivalency also applies if the quantitative comparator is genome copies determined from live virus preparations. Taken together, our data support the continued ability of the antigen tests examined to detect the Omicron variant.Competing Interest StatementLumiraDx provided instrumentation and diagnostic antigen testing kits; Abbott provided Binax Now antigen testing kits; and Ginkgo Bioworks provided CareStart antigen testing kits for the study. J.E.K. received support from Abbott Molecular unrelated to this study under a COVID-19 Diagnostics Evaluation Agreement. Abbott, LumiraDx, and Ginkgo Bioworks had no role in study design, manuscript preparation or decision to publish. All authors, no other conflicts of interestFunding StatementLumiraDx provided instrumentation and diagnostic kits; Abbott provided diagnostic Binax Now kits; and Ginkgo Bioworks provided CareStart antigen testing kits for the study. This study did not receive other funding.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesI confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.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.YesAll data produced in the present work are contained in the manuscript.