RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Is there a role for RDTs as we live with COVID? An assessment of different strategies
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2022.09.30.22280569
DO 10.1101/2022.09.30.22280569
A1 Bonnet, Gabrielle
A1 Vassall, Anna
A1 Jit, Mark
YR 2022
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/10/01/2022.09.30.22280569.abstract
AB Introduction By 2022, high levels of past COVID-19 infections, combined with substantial levels of vaccination and the development of Omicron have shifted country strategies toward burden reduction policies. SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen tests (RDTs) could contribute to these policies by helping rapidly detect, isolate and/or treat infections in different settings. However, the evidence to inform RDT policy choices in LMICs is limited.Method We provide an overview of the potential impact of several RDT use cases (surveillance; testing, tracing and isolation without and with surveillance; hospital-based screening to reduce nosocomial COVID; and testing to enable earlier/expanded treatment) for a range of country settings. We use conceptual models and literature review to identify which use cases are likely to bring benefits and how these may change with outbreak characteristics. Impacts are measured through multiple outcomes related to gaining time, reducing the burden on the health system, and reducing deaths.Results In an optimal scenario in terms of resources and capacity and with baseline parameters, we find marginal time gains of at least a week through surveillance and testing tracing and isolation with surveillance, a reduction in peak ICU or ICU admissions by 6% or more (hospital-based screening; testing, tracing and isolation), and reductions in COVID deaths by over 6% (hospital-based screening; test and treat). Time gains may be used to strengthen ICU capacity and/or boost vulnerable individuals, though only a small minority of at-risk individuals could be reached in the time available. The impact of RDTs declines with lower country resources and capacity, more transmissible or immune-escaping variants and reduced test sensitivity.Conclusion RDTs alone are unlikely to dramatically reduce the burden of COVID-19 in LMICs, though they may have an important role alongside other interventions such as vaccination, therapeutic drugs, improved healthcare capacity and non-pharmaceutical measures.KEY MESSAGESWhat is already known: Important shifts in the way COVID is addressed, from efforts to reduce COVID transmission toward burden reduction, have led to question the role of testing, in particular SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen tests (RDTs), both in countries that used them extensively and in those in which RDTs were never scaled-up, but the evidence to inform RDT policy choices in LMICs is particularly limited.What this study adds: This study provides an overview of multiple RDT use cases and their potential impacts to gain time, reduce health system burdens and reduce deaths. It shows the contrast between high- and low-resource and capacity settings, and how some use cases (surveillance, hospital-based screening, and testing associated with early/expanded treatment) may retain higher benefits, at least with regard to early warning and hospital burden, than the use of RDTs for testing, tracing and isolation.How this study might affect research, practice or policy: The study highlights that RDTs alone are unlikely to dramatically reduce the burden of COVID-19 in LMICs, and that their role may be best understood as complementary to other interventions.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementThis work was partly funded by and is a contribution to: Unitaid/PSI's 3ACP 100584IR grant, the Wellcome Trust's SCALE ITCRZJ40 grant, and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation's 100926PH grant.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