Journal of clinical virology : the official publication of the Pan American Society for Clinical Virology · 2021
Evaluation of the Elecsys SARS-CoV-2 antigen assay for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 in nasopharyngeal swabs.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Ben Abdelhanin Myriam, Mvumbi Dieudonné M, Agathine Aurélie, Nanos Nikolaos, Gidenne Stéphane
Аннотация
AIMS: The aim of this study was to evaluate the performance of the automated Elecsys® SARS-CoV-2 antigen assay compared to RT-PCR taken as the gold standard for SARS-CoV-2 detection.
METHODS: 225 nasopharyngeal swabs were randomly collected among which 123 were tested positive and 102 negatives for SARS-CoV-2 based on RT-PCR. Antigen dosing were performed on a Cobas 8000 e801 analyzer.
RESULTS: The antigen test diagnosed SARS-CoV-2 infection status with an overall sensitivity of 65,85% (95% CI 56,76-74,16%), a specificity of 100% (95% CI 96,49-100%) with a Cut-off value ≥ 1. When the cut-off value for the antigen assay was set to > 0,673 COI, the accuracy reached its highest level with a sensitivity of 74,8% (95% CI 66,2 - 82,2%) and a specificity of 97,1% (95% CI 91,6 - 99,4%). Imprecision was estimated in accordance with manufacturer's claims.
CONCLUSIONS: We obtained an overall sensitivity of 65,85% (95% CI 56,76-74,16%) and a specificity of 100% (95% CI 96,49-100%), slightly higher than the results reported by the manufacturer. Yet, it remains relatively low comparatively to what is generally acceptable for these antigenic assays (a relative sensitivity of 80%). We also noticed that the accuracy could reach its highest level if the cut-off is set above 0,673 which is lower than established by the manufacturer. Thus, our results suggest that the Elecsys® SARS-CoV-2 Antigen assays, should be improved prior to be used in a SARS-Cov-2 screening strategy. However, if one antigenic assay could demonstrate acceptable performance, it might be centralized in clinical laboratories, keeping the RT-PCR in a second phase for confirmation.
METHODS: 225 nasopharyngeal swabs were randomly collected among which 123 were tested positive and 102 negatives for SARS-CoV-2 based on RT-PCR. Antigen dosing were performed on a Cobas 8000 e801 analyzer.
RESULTS: The antigen test diagnosed SARS-CoV-2 infection status with an overall sensitivity of 65,85% (95% CI 56,76-74,16%), a specificity of 100% (95% CI 96,49-100%) with a Cut-off value ≥ 1. When the cut-off value for the antigen assay was set to > 0,673 COI, the accuracy reached its highest level with a sensitivity of 74,8% (95% CI 66,2 - 82,2%) and a specificity of 97,1% (95% CI 91,6 - 99,4%). Imprecision was estimated in accordance with manufacturer's claims.
CONCLUSIONS: We obtained an overall sensitivity of 65,85% (95% CI 56,76-74,16%) and a specificity of 100% (95% CI 96,49-100%), slightly higher than the results reported by the manufacturer. Yet, it remains relatively low comparatively to what is generally acceptable for these antigenic assays (a relative sensitivity of 80%). We also noticed that the accuracy could reach its highest level if the cut-off is set above 0,673 which is lower than established by the manufacturer. Thus, our results suggest that the Elecsys® SARS-CoV-2 Antigen assays, should be improved prior to be used in a SARS-Cov-2 screening strategy. However, if one antigenic assay could demonstrate acceptable performance, it might be centralized in clinical laboratories, keeping the RT-PCR in a second phase for confirmation.