As the COVID-19 pandemic progresses, there is an increasing need for rapid, accessible assays for SARS-CoV-2 detection. We present a clinical evaluation and real-world implementation of the INDICAID COVID-19 rapid antigen test (INDICAID rapid test). A multisite clinical evaluation of the INDICAID rapid test using prospectively collected nasal (bilateral anterior) swab samples from symptomatic subjects was performed. The INDICAID rapid test demonstrated a positive percent agreement (PPA) and negative percent agreement (NPA) of 85.3% (95% confidence interval [95% CI], 75.6% to 91.6%) and 94.9% (95% CI, 91.6% to 96.9%), respectively, compared to laboratory-based reverse transcriptase PCR (RT-PCR) using nasal specimens.

The INDICAID rapid test was then implemented at COVID-19 outbreak screening centers in Hong Kong as part of a testing algorithm (termed “dual-track”) to screen asymptomatic individuals for prioritization for confirmatory RT-PCR testing. In one approach, preliminary positive INDICAID rapid test results triggered expedited processing for laboratory-based RT-PCR, reducing the average time to confirmatory result from 10.85 h to 7.0 h.

In a second approach, preliminary positive results triggered subsequent testing with an onsite rapid RT-PCR, reducing the average time to confirmatory result to 0.84 h. In 22,994 asymptomatic patients, the INDICAID rapid test demonstrated a PPA of 84.2% (95% CI, 69.6% to 92.6%) and an NPA of 99.9% (95% CI, 99.9% to 100%) compared to laboratory-based RT-PCR using combined nasal/oropharyngeal specimens. The INDICAID rapid test has excellent performance compared to laboratory-based RT-PCR testing and, when used in tandem with RT-PCR, reduces the time to confirmatory positive result.

IMPORTANCE Laboratory-based RT-PCR, the current gold standard for COVID-19 testing, can require a turnaround time of 24 to 48 h from sample collection to result. The delayed time to result limits the effectiveness of centralized RT-PCR testing to reduce transmission and stem potential outbreaks. To address this, we conducted a thorough evaluation of the INDICAID COVID-19 rapid antigen test, a 20-minute rapid antigen test, in both symptomatic and asymptomatic populations.

The INDICAID rapid test demonstrated high sensitivity and specificity with RT-PCR as the comparator method. A dual-track testing algorithm was also evaluated utilizing the INDICAID rapid test to screen for preliminary positive patients, whose samples were then prioritized for RT-PCR testing. The dual-track method demonstrated significant improvements in expediting the reporting of positive RT-PCR test results compared to standard RT-PCR testing without prioritization, offering an improved strategy for community testing and controlling SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks.

See This One: Snailase. Cat# abx082089. Supplier: abbexa.

Delayed Influenza Treatment in Children With False-Negative Rapid Antigen Test: A Retrospective Single-Center Study in Korea 2016-2019

Rapid Antigen Test Combine with Nucleic Acid Detection: A Better Strategy for COVID-19 Screening at Points of Entry

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has imposed an enormous disease burden worldwide, and the Delta variant now has become dominant in 53 countries. Recently published studies have shown that during periods of high viral load, rapid antigen tests (RAT) yield similar results to reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) tests, and when used in serial screening (e.g., every three days), it has a high sensitivity.

In this perspective, we recommend RT-PCR combined with RAT at points of entry: (i) RAT can be added to the detection phase at ports of entry to detect asymptomatic infections as early as possible; (ii) RAT can be added to post-entry quarantine every three days or less to reduce the rate of missed detection in later quarantine; (iii) Adding regular RAT to regular PCR testing for key airport personnel to prevent cross-infection and conduct closed-off management.

In the face of sporadic Delta variant outbreaks, the combination of the two could help rapid triage and management of suspected populations at an early stage and thus contain the outbreak more quickly and effectively. We also discuss the issue of whether the current antigen detection reagents can cope with various SARS-CoV-2 variants.

Multicenter Technical Validation of 30 Rapid Antigen Tests for the Detection of SARS-CoV-2 (VALIDATE)

During COVID19 pandemic, SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen tests (RATs) were marketed with minimal or no performance data. We aimed at closing this gap by determining technical sensitivities and specificities of 30 RATs prior to market release. We developed a standardized technical validation protocol and assessed 30 RATs across four diagnostic laboratories. RATs were tested in parallel using the Standard Q (SD Biosensor/Roche) assay as internal reference. We used left-over universal transport/optimum media from nasopharyngeal swabs of 200 SARS-CoV-2 PCR-negative and 100 PCR-positive tested patients.

Transport media was mixed with assay buffer and applied to RATs according to manufacturer instructions. Sensitivities were determined according to viral loads. Specificity of at least 99% and sensitivity of 95%, 90%, and 80% had to be reached for 10⁷, 10⁶, 10⁵ virus copies/mL, respectively. Sensitivities ranged from 43.5% to 98.6%, 62.3% to 100%, and 66.7% to 100% at 10⁵, 10⁶, 10⁷ copies/mL, respectively. Automated assay readers such as ExDia or LumiraDx showed higher performances. Specificities ranged from 88.8% to 100%. Only 15 of 30 (50%) RATs passed our technical validation. Due to the high failure rate of 50%, mainly caused by lack of sensitivity, we recommend a thorough validation of RATs prior to market release.