Comparison of Manual versus Automated SARS-CoV-2 Rapid Antigen Testing in Asymptomatic Individuals
The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has infected more than 770 M people and killed more than 6.9 M persons worldwide. In the USA, as of August 2023, it has infected more than 103 M people while causing more than 1.1 M deaths. During a pandemic, it is necessary to rapidly identify those individuals infected with the virus so that disease transmission can be stopped. We examined the sensitivity of the Quidel Rapid Antigen test on the manual Sofia 2 platform and the Beckman-Coulter antigen test on the automated DxI-800 system for use in screening asymptomatic individuals at the University of Arizona from March through May 2021. A total of 378 asymptomatic subjects along with 176 validation sets of samples in 23 independent experiments were assessed in side-by-side antigen testing using both assays. Nasal swabs and saliva were used as viral sources. Manual testing (Quidel) was compared with automated testing (Beckman) methods for cost and efficiency. Limit dilution of viral antigen spiked samples was performed to determine sensitivity to antigen load by the tests. The results between the two tests were found to be concordant. Both tests were comparable in terms of detecting low numbers of positive subjects in the asymptomatic population. A concordance of 98% was observed between the two tests. Experiments also demonstrated that saliva specimens were an acceptable viral source and produced comparable results for each test. Overall, the two methods were interchangeable.
| Medienart: |
E-Artikel |
|---|
| Erscheinungsjahr: |
2023 |
|---|---|
| Erschienen: |
2023 |
| Enthalten in: |
Zur Gesamtaufnahme - volume:12 |
|---|---|
| Enthalten in: |
Journal of clinical medicine - 12(2023), 22 vom: 17. Nov. |
| Sprache: |
Englisch |
|---|
| Beteiligte Personen: |
Harris, David T [VerfasserIn] |
|---|
| Links: |
|---|
| Themen: |
Asymptomatic |
|---|
| Anmerkungen: |
Date Revised 27.11.2023 published: Electronic Citation Status PubMed-not-MEDLINE |
|---|
| doi: |
10.3390/jcm12227146 |
|---|
| funding: |
|
|---|---|
| Förderinstitution / Projekttitel: |
|
| PPN (Katalog-ID): |
NLM364939745 |
|---|
| LEADER | 01000naa a22002652 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | NLM364939745 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20231226100622.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 231226s2023 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.3390/jcm12227146 |2 doi | |
| 028 | 5 | 2 | |a pubmed24n1216.xml |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)NLM364939745 | ||
| 035 | |a (NLM)38002757 | ||
| 035 | |a (PII)7146 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Harris, David T |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Comparison of Manual versus Automated SARS-CoV-2 Rapid Antigen Testing in Asymptomatic Individuals |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2023 | |
| 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 Revised 27.11.2023 | ||
| 500 | |a published: Electronic | ||
| 500 | |a Citation Status PubMed-not-MEDLINE | ||
| 520 | |a The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has infected more than 770 M people and killed more than 6.9 M persons worldwide. In the USA, as of August 2023, it has infected more than 103 M people while causing more than 1.1 M deaths. During a pandemic, it is necessary to rapidly identify those individuals infected with the virus so that disease transmission can be stopped. We examined the sensitivity of the Quidel Rapid Antigen test on the manual Sofia 2 platform and the Beckman-Coulter antigen test on the automated DxI-800 system for use in screening asymptomatic individuals at the University of Arizona from March through May 2021. A total of 378 asymptomatic subjects along with 176 validation sets of samples in 23 independent experiments were assessed in side-by-side antigen testing using both assays. Nasal swabs and saliva were used as viral sources. Manual testing (Quidel) was compared with automated testing (Beckman) methods for cost and efficiency. Limit dilution of viral antigen spiked samples was performed to determine sensitivity to antigen load by the tests. The results between the two tests were found to be concordant. Both tests were comparable in terms of detecting low numbers of positive subjects in the asymptomatic population. A concordance of 98% was observed between the two tests. Experiments also demonstrated that saliva specimens were an acceptable viral source and produced comparable results for each test. Overall, the two methods were interchangeable | ||
| 650 | 4 | |a Journal Article | |
| 650 | 4 | |a COVID-19 | |
| 650 | 4 | |a SARS-CoV-2 | |
| 650 | 4 | |a asymptomatic | |
| 650 | 4 | |a diagnostics | |
| 650 | 4 | |a rapid antigen testing | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Ingraham, Nicole |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Badowski, Michael |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t Journal of clinical medicine |d 2012 |g 12(2023), 22 vom: 17. Nov. |w (DE-627)NLM230666310 |x 2077-0383 |7 nnns |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:12 |g year:2023 |g number:22 |g day:17 |g month:11 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm12227146 |3 Volltext |
| 912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_A | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_NLM | ||
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| 952 | |d 12 |j 2023 |e 22 |b 17 |c 11 | ||