Search

Background: The nucleic acid amplification test (NAAT) and antigen test are approved diagnostic tests for COVID-19. In this study, we aimed to investigate the assay performance of two NAATs (Xpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2 and FilmArray Respiratory Panel) and a quantitative antigen test (Lumipulse). Methods: One hundred and sixty-five nasopharyngeal swabs were subjected to Xpert, FilmArray, Lumipulse, and RT-qPCR assays. Results: Of 165 samples, RT-qPCR showed 100 positives and 65 negatives. The Xpert had an overall agreement of 99.4% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 96.7–99.4%), sensitivity of 99% (95% CI: 96.8–99%), and specificity of 100% (95% CI: 96.6–100%). FilmArray had an overall agreement of 98.8% (95% CI: 95.9–98.8%), sensitivity of 98% (95% CI: 95.6–98%), and specificity of 100% (95% CI: 96.3–100%). Lumipulse had an overall agreement of 95.5% (95% CI: 91.8–95.5%), sensitivity of 92.3% (95% CI: 89.2–92.3%), and specificity of 100% (95% CI: 95.5–100%). The κ coefficient showed excellent agreement between each test and RT-qPCR. There was a high correlation between Xpert Ct values, RT-qPCR Ct values, viral loads and antigen level. Conclusions: Xpert Xpress and FilmArray Respiratory Panel exhibited an equivalent performance. The Lumipulse antigen test was slightly less sensitive than the NAATs, but showed high assay performance except for samples with low viral load. The Xpert Xpress, FilmArray Respiratory Panel and Lumipulse antigen tests offer rapid sample-to-answer data, allowing random access detection on automated devices. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• We compared the results of quantitative SARS-CoV-2 Ag tests of Roche and Lumipulse. • Both Ag tests were positive for samples containing high viral loads. • Quantitative Ag levels correlated with viral loads and threshold cycle values. • Quantitative Ag levels determined using the two Ag tests were highly correlated. • The two Ag tests showed high concordance up to 9 days after symptom onset. Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) continues to spread worldwide. Here, we evaluated the performance of two quantitative antigen (Ag) tests, the Roche and Lumipulse Ag tests, using automated platforms. We collected 637 nasopharyngeal swab samples from 274 individuals. Samples were subjected to quantitative reverse transcription PCR (RT-qPCR), the Roche Ag test and Lumipulse Ag test. When RT-qPCR was used as a reference, the overall concordance rate of the Roche Ag test was 77.1% (491/637) with 70.0% (341/487) sensitivity and 100% specificity (150/150). When inconclusive results of the Lumipulse Ag test were excluded, the overall concordance rate of the Lumipulse Ag test was 88.3% (467/529) with 84.8% (330/389) sensitivity and 97.9% (137/140) specificity. The overall concordance rate between the Roche and Lumipulse Ag tests was 97.9% (518/529) with 96.7% (322/333) sensitivity and 100% (196/196) specificity. Quantitative Ag levels determined using the Roche and Lumipulse Ag tests were highly correlated (R2 = 0.922). The Roche and Lumipulse Ag tests showed high concordance up to nine days after symptom onset, with progressively lower concordance after that. The Roche and Lumipulse Ag tests showed equivalent assay performance and represent promising approaches for diagnosing coronavirus disease 2019. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• Prospective study on the utility of the LUMIPULSE antigen (Ag) test in 1308 samples. • The sensitivity of the Ag test was 92.5% and the specificity was 100%. • Discrepant results attributable to low viral load collected from seropositive cases. • Ag level decreased in COVID-19 patients collected after 10 days of symptom onset. • The LUMIPULSE SARS-CoV-2 Ag test is a sensitive and highly specific diagnostic tool. Reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) is the gold standard for detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2). Previously, the accuracy of the quantitative LUMIPULSE SARS-CoV-2 antigen test was demonstrated using samples collected retrospectively. In this study, the LUMIPULSE antigen test was clinically validated using prospective samples. In total, 1033 nasopharyngeal swab samples were collected from 1033 individuals, and an additional 275 follow-up samples were collected from 43 patients who subsequently tested positive for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). All 1308 samples were subjected to quantitative RT-PCR (RT-qPCR) and the antigen test. The antibody response was investigated for patients with discordant results to clarify if seroconversion had occurred. RT-qPCR identified 990 samples as negative and 43 as positive, while the antigen test identified 992 samples as negative, 37 as positive and four as inconclusive. The overall concordance rate was 99.7% (1026/1029). Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value of the antigen test were 92.5% (37/40), 100% (989/989), 100% (37/37) and 99.7% (989/992), respectively, after exclusion of the four inconclusive results. The kappa coefficient was 0.960 (95% confidence interval 0.892–0.960), suggesting excellent agreement between the two tests. Seropositivity in five of seven patients with discordant results suggested that the discrepancy was caused by samples collected during the late phase of infection. Using follow-up samples, correlation was observed between the antigen level and the viral load or cycle threshold value. The concordance rate between these test results tended to be high among samples collected 0–9 days after symptom onset, but this decreased gradually in samples collected thereafter. This prospective study demonstrated that the LUMIPULSE antigen test is a highly accurate diagnostic test for SARS-CoV-2. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Various diagnostic tests utilizing different principles are currently under development for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). However, these tests can occasionally produce discrepant results, causing confusion in their interpretation. Here, we evaluated the performance and features of three diagnostic assays: quantitative reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR), FilmArray Respiratory Panel (RP) v2.1, and the LUMIPULSE antigen test. Twenty-seven serial nasopharyngeal swabs were collected from a prolonged viral shedding patient who had been hospitalized for 51 days. We examined the SARS-CoV-2 detection rates of the three tests. The overall agreement rate was 81% between RT-qPCR and FilmArray RP v2.1, 63% between the antigen test and FilmArray RP v2.1, and 59% between the antigen test and RT-qPCR. We obtained concordant results in samples with high viral loads (low threshold cycle values) by all three tests. RT-qPCR and FilmArray RP v2.1 accurately detected SARS-CoV-2 at the early to intermediate phases of infection, but the results varied at the late phase. The antigen test also produced a positive result at the early phase but varied at the intermediate phase and consistently produced negative results at late phase of infection. These results demonstrated FilmArray RP v2.1 could detect SARS-CoV-2 with accuracy comparable to RT-qPCR. Further, there were discrepant results using different types of diagnostic tests during the clinical course of prolonged viral shedding patient. We provided insights into how to utilize different types of kits to assess and manage SARS-CoV-2 infections. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• We assess the performance of the LUMIPULSE antigen test compared to RT-qPCR • The antigen level was significantly higher in PCR-positive samples than in negative samples • The antigen test determined all samples (>100 viral copies) to be positive • Likewise, it determined 85% of samples (>10 viral copies) to be positive • The kinetics of viral loads and antigen levels showed a similar declining trend In routine clinical practice, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection is determined by reverse-transcription PCR (RT-PCR). In the current pandemic, a more rapid and high-throughput method is in growing demand. Here, we validated the performance of a new antigen test (LUMIPULSE) based on chemiluminescence enzyme immunoassay. A total of 313 nasopharyngeal swabs (82 serial samples from 7 infected patients and 231 individual samples from 4 infected patients and 215 uninfected individuals) were analyzed for SARS-CoV-2 with quantitative RT-PCR (RT-qPCR) and then subjected to LUMIPULSE. We determined the cutoff value for antigen detection using receiver operating characteristic curve analysis and compared the performance of the antigen test with that of RT-qPCR. We also compared the viral loads and antigen levels in serial samples from seven infected patients. Using RT-qPCR as the reference, the antigen test exhibited 55.2% sensitivity and 99.6% specificity, with a 91.4% overall agreement rate (286/313). In specimens with > 100 viral copies and between 10 and 100 copies, the antigen test showed 100% and 85% concordance with RT-qPCR, respectively. This concordance declined with lower viral loads. In the serially followed patients, the antigen levels showed a steady decline, along with viral clearance. This gradual decline was in contrast with the abrupt positive-to-negative and negative-to-positive status changes observed with RT-qPCR, particularly in the late phase of infection. In summary, the LUMIPULSE antigen test can rapidly identify SARS-CoV-2-infected individuals with moderate to high viral loads and may be helpful for monitoring viral clearance in hospitalized patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]