Comparative sensitivity evaluation for 122 CE-marked rapid diagnostic tests for SARS-CoV-2 antigen, Germany, September 2020 to April 2021
IntroductionNumerous CE-marked SARS-CoV-2 antigen rapid diagnostic tests (Ag RDT) are offered in Europe, several of them with unconfirmed quality claims.AimWe performed an independent head-to-head evaluation of the sensitivity of SARS-CoV-2 Ag RDT offered in Germany.MethodsWe addressed the sensitivity of 122 Ag RDT in direct comparison using a common evaluation panel comprised of 50 specimens. Minimum sensitivity of 75% for panel specimens with a PCR quantification cycle (Cq) ≤ 25 was used to identify Ag RDT eligible for reimbursement in the German healthcare system.ResultsThe sensitivity of different SARS-CoV-2 Ag RDT varied over a wide range. The sensitivity limit of 75% for panel members with Cq ≤ 25 was met by 96 of the 122 tests evaluated; 26 tests exhibited lower sensitivity, few of which failed completely. Some RDT exhibited high sensitivity, e.g. 97.5 % for Cq < 30.ConclusionsThis comparative evaluation succeeded in distinguishing less sensitive from better performing Ag RDT. Most of the evaluated Ag RDT appeared to be suitable for fast identification of acute infections associated with high viral loads. Market access of SARS-CoV-2 Ag RDT should be based on minimal requirements for sensitivity and specificity.
| Errataetall: | |
|---|---|
| Medienart: |
E-Artikel |
| Erscheinungsjahr: |
2021 |
|---|---|
| Erschienen: |
2021 |
| Enthalten in: |
Zur Gesamtaufnahme - volume:26 |
|---|---|
| Enthalten in: |
Euro surveillance : bulletin Europeen sur les maladies transmissibles = European communicable disease bulletin - 26(2021), 44 vom: 03. Nov. |
| Sprache: |
Englisch |
|---|
| Beteiligte Personen: |
Scheiblauer, Heinrich [VerfasserIn] |
|---|
| Links: |
|---|
| Themen: |
Antigens, Viral |
|---|
| Anmerkungen: |
Date Completed 09.11.2021 Date Revised 04.04.2024 published: Print CommentIn: Euro Surveill. 2021 Nov;26(45):. - PMID 34763755 Citation Status MEDLINE |
|---|
| doi: |
10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2021.26.44.2100441 |
|---|
| funding: |
|
|---|---|
| Förderinstitution / Projekttitel: |
|
| PPN (Katalog-ID): |
NLM332766012 |
|---|
| LEADER | 01000caa a22002652 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | NLM332766012 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20240404232749.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 231225s2021 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2021.26.44.2100441 |2 doi | |
| 028 | 5 | 2 | |a pubmed24n1364.xml |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)NLM332766012 | ||
| 035 | |a (NLM)34738515 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Scheiblauer, Heinrich |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Comparative sensitivity evaluation for 122 CE-marked rapid diagnostic tests for SARS-CoV-2 antigen, Germany, September 2020 to April 2021 |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2021 | |
| 336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a ƒaComputermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a ƒa Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 500 | |a Date Completed 09.11.2021 | ||
| 500 | |a Date Revised 04.04.2024 | ||
| 500 | |a published: Print | ||
| 500 | |a CommentIn: Euro Surveill. 2021 Nov;26(45):. - PMID 34763755 | ||
| 500 | |a Citation Status MEDLINE | ||
| 520 | |a IntroductionNumerous CE-marked SARS-CoV-2 antigen rapid diagnostic tests (Ag RDT) are offered in Europe, several of them with unconfirmed quality claims.AimWe performed an independent head-to-head evaluation of the sensitivity of SARS-CoV-2 Ag RDT offered in Germany.MethodsWe addressed the sensitivity of 122 Ag RDT in direct comparison using a common evaluation panel comprised of 50 specimens. Minimum sensitivity of 75% for panel specimens with a PCR quantification cycle (Cq) ≤ 25 was used to identify Ag RDT eligible for reimbursement in the German healthcare system.ResultsThe sensitivity of different SARS-CoV-2 Ag RDT varied over a wide range. The sensitivity limit of 75% for panel members with Cq ≤ 25 was met by 96 of the 122 tests evaluated; 26 tests exhibited lower sensitivity, few of which failed completely. Some RDT exhibited high sensitivity, e.g. 97.5 % for Cq < 30.ConclusionsThis comparative evaluation succeeded in distinguishing less sensitive from better performing Ag RDT. Most of the evaluated Ag RDT appeared to be suitable for fast identification of acute infections associated with high viral loads. Market access of SARS-CoV-2 Ag RDT should be based on minimal requirements for sensitivity and specificity | ||
| 650 | 4 | |a Journal Article | |
| 650 | 4 | |a CE mark | |
| 650 | 4 | |a COVID 19 | |
| 650 | 4 | |a SARS-CoV-2 antigen | |
| 650 | 4 | |a rapid diagnostic test | |
| 650 | 4 | |a sensitivity evaluation | |
| 650 | 7 | |a Antigens, Viral |2 NLM | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Filomena, Angela |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Nitsche, Andreas |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Puyskens, Andreas |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Corman, Victor M |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Drosten, Christian |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Zwirglmaier, Karin |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Lange, Constanze |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Emmerich, Petra |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Müller, Michael |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Knauer, Olivia |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Nübling, C Micha |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t Euro surveillance : bulletin Europeen sur les maladies transmissibles = European communicable disease bulletin |d 1995 |g 26(2021), 44 vom: 03. Nov. |w (DE-627)NLM115683283 |x 1560-7917 |7 nnns |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:26 |g year:2021 |g number:44 |g day:03 |g month:11 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u http://dx.doi.org/10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2021.26.44.2100441 |3 Volltext |
| 912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_A | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_NLM | ||
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| 952 | |d 26 |j 2021 |e 44 |b 03 |c 11 | ||