RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Limitations of molecular and antigen test performance for SARS-CoV-2 in symptomatic and asymptomatic COVID-19 contacts
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2022.02.05.22270481
DO 10.1101/2022.02.05.22270481
A1 Robinson, Matthew L.
A1 Mirza, Agha
A1 Gallagher, Nicholas
A1 Boudreau, Alec
A1 Garcia, Lydia
A1 Yu, Tong
A1 Norton, Julie
A1 Luo, Chun Huai
A1 Conte, Abigail
A1 Zhou, Ruifeng
A1 Kafka, Kim
A1 Hardick, Justin
A1 McManus, David D.
A1 Gibson, Laura L.
A1 Pekosz, Andrew
A1 Mostafa, Heba
A1 Manabe, Yukari C.
YR 2022
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/02/07/2022.02.05.22270481.abstract
AB Objectives COVID-19 has brought unprecedented attention to the crucial role of diagnostics in pandemic control. We compared SARS-CoV-2 test performance by sample type and modality in close contacts of SARS-CoV-2 cases.Methods Close contacts of SARS-CoV-2 positive individuals were enrolled after informed consent. Clinician-collected nasopharyngeal (NP) swabs in viral transport media (VTM) were tested with a nucleic acid test (NAT). NP VTM and self-collected passive drool were tested using the PerkinElmer real-time reverse transcription PCR (RT-PCR) assay. For the first 4 months of study, mid-turbinate swabs were tested using the BD Veritor rapid antigen test. NAT positive NP samples were tested for infectivity using a VeroE6TMPRSS2 cell culture model.Results Between November 17, 2020, and October 1, 2021, 235 close contacts of SARS-CoV-2 cases were recruited, including 95 with symptoms (82% symptomatic for <5 days) and 140 asymptomatic individuals. NP swab reference tests were positive for 53 (22.6%) participants; 24/50 (48%) were culture positive. PerkinElmer testing of NP and saliva samples identified an additional 28 (11.9%) SARS-CoV-2 cases who tested negative by clinical NAT. Antigen tests performed for 99 close contacts showed 83% positive percent agreement (PPA) with reference NAT among early symptomatic persons, but 18% PPA in others; antigen tests in 8 of 11 (72.7%) culture-positive participants were positive.Conclusions Contacts of SARS-CoV-2 cases may be falsely negative early after contact, which more sensitive platforms may identify. Repeat or serial SARS-CoV-2 testing with both antigen and molecular assays may be warranted for individuals with high pretest probability for infection.Competing Interest StatementBecton Dickenson provided Veritor test kits for use in this study but did not contribute to the writing of this manuscript nor critically review its content. DDM reports consulting and research grants from Bristol-Myers Squibb and Pfizer, consulting and research support from Fitbit, consulting and research support from Flexcon, research grant from Boehringer Ingelheim, consulting from Avania, non-financial research support from Apple Computer, consulting/other support from Heart Rhythm Society. LG is on a scientific advisory board for Moderna on projects unrelated to SARS-CoV-2. HHM reports receipt of research contracts from BioRad, DiaSorin, and Hologic. YCM has received tests from Quanterix, Becton-Dickinson, Ceres, and Hologic for research-related purposes, consults for Abbott on subjects unrelated to SARS-CoV-2, and receives funding support to Johns Hopkins University from miDiagnostics.Funding StatementThis study was funded by the NIH RADx-Tech program under 3U54HL143541-02S2 and U54EB007958-12S1. The views expressed in this manuscript are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering; the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; the National Institutes of Health, or the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Salary support from the National Institutes of Health U54EB007958-13 (YCM, MLR, JH), AI272201400007C (AP, YCM), UM1AI068613 (YCM), U54HL143541, R01HL141434, R01HL137784, R01HL155343, R61HL158541, R01HL137734 (DDM).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 study was approved by the Johns Hopkins School of Medicine Internal Review Board.I 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.YesData produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors.