Abstract
Objectives To assess the real-world diagnostic accuracy of the Livzon point-of-care rapid test for antibodies to SARS-COV-2
Design Prospective cohort study
Setting District general hospital in England
Participants 173 Patients and 224 hospital staff with a history of COVID-19 symptoms, and who underwent PCR and/or reference antibody testing for COVID-19.
Interventions The Livzon point-of-care (POC) lateral flow immunoassay rapid antibody test (IgM and IgG) was conducted at least 7 days after onset of symptoms and compared to the composite reference standard of PCR for SARS-COV-2 plus reference laboratory testing for antibodies to SARS-COV-2. The SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR was tested using the available molecular technology during the study time (PHE laboratories, GeneXpert® system Xpert, Xpress SARS-CoV-2 and Source bioscience laboratory). All molecular platforms/assays were PHE/NHSE approved. The reference antibody test was the Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 assay (Roche diagnostics GmBH).
Main outcome measures Sensitivity and specificity of the rapid antibody test
Results The reference antibody test was positive in 190/268 (70.9%) of participants with a history of symptoms suggestive of COVID-19; in the majority (n=312) the POC test was taken 35 days or more after onset of symptoms. The POC antibody test had an overall sensitivity of 90.1% (292/328, 95% CI 86.3 – 93.1) and specificity of 100% (68/68, 95% CI 94.7 - 100) for confirming prior SARS-CoV-2 infection when compared to the composite reference standard. Sensitivity was 97.8% (89/92, 95% CI 92.3% to 99.7%) in participants who had been admitted to hospital and 84.4% (124/147, 95% CI 77.5% to 89.8%) in those with milder illness who had never been seen in hospital.
Conclusions The Livzon point-of-care antibody test had comparable sensitivity and specificity to the reference laboratory antibody test, so could be used in clinical settings to support decision-making about patients presenting with more than 10 days of symptoms of COVID-19.
What is already known on this topic
- Presence of IgG and IgM antibodies to SARS-COV-2 indicates that the person was infected at least 7 days previously and is usually no longer infectious.
- Rapid point-of-care tests for antibodies to SARS-COV-2 are widely available, cheap and easy to use
- Preliminary evaluations suggested that rapid antibody tests may have insufficient accuracy to be useful for testing individual patients.
What this study adds
- The rapid point-of-care test for antibodies to SARS-COV-2 was 90.1% sensitive and 100% specific compared to reference standards for prior infection with COVID-19.
- This is comparable to reference antibody tests
- The point-of-care test evaluated in this study could be used to support clinical decision-making in real time, for patients presenting with symptoms of possible COVID-19 with at least 10 days of symptoms.
Competing Interest Statement
All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form at www.icmje.org/coi_disclosure.pdf. Prof Wilkinson reports grants, personal fees and other from AstraZeneca, grants and personal fees from Synairgen, grants and personal fees from MyMHealth, grants from GSK, grants from Bergenbio and grants from UC, outside the submitted work. Prof Griffiths reports grants from Jannsenn-Cilag, grants from AZ, grants from Novartis, grants from Astex, grants from Roche, grants from Heartflow, personal fees from Celldex, grants from BMS, grants from BionTech, outside the submitted work. All other authors declare: no support from any organisation for the submitted work; no financial relationships with any organisations that might have an interest in the submitted work in the previous three years; no other relationships or activities that could appear to have influenced the submitted work.
Clinical Trial
This is not a clinical trial; it is a diagnostic accuracy study.
Funding Statement
The POC tests were funded by The Medical Director's cardiology charity and by individuals donating to a Just Giving page. We received no commercial funding or free tests from the manufacturer. West Hertfordshire Hospitals NHS Trust supported clinical staff time. MLW's salary was funded by the National Institute of Health Research (NIHR), under grant CL-2016-26-005. Southampton CTU staff were supported by NIHR CTU Support Funding. The funders had no role in this research.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
This study was approved by the Faculty of Medicine Research Ethics Committee at the University of Southampton (reference 56480) and by the Wales Research Ethics Committee 4 (Wrexham, IRAS 283264, REC 20/WA/0148).
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I 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).
Yes
I 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.
Yes
Data Availability
Data is available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.
