Rapid Antigen Test in the Diagnosis of COVID-19

Abstract

Aim: The COVID-19 pandemic has shown the importance of laboratory-based diagnosis in the control of infectious diseases. Early and accurate diagnosis of COVID-19 is crucial for limiting the spread of infection and determining the treatment to be applied to patients. Our study compared the results of real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) and rapid antigen tests to diagnose COVID-19. Material and Method: Nasal and throat swab samples sent from 500 patients to our laboratory were studied by RT-PCR method with Multiplex RT-qPCR Diagnostic Kit 1000 rxn (CORONEX, Türkiye) and by Abbot COVID-19 Ag Rapid Test Device (Germany) immunochromotographic method by the recommendations of the manufacturer companies. The patient’s Demographic information in the study was taken from the hospital information automation system. Results: Of the 500 patients participating in the study, 202 (40.4%) were women, and 298 (59.6%) were men. While 57 patients (11.4%) were detected positively by the RT-PCR method, 54(10.4%) were detected positively by a rapid antigen test method. Of the 57 patients found positive by the RT-PCR method, 8 (14%) were negative by a rapid antigen test method. Of the 54 patients found positive by the rapid antigen test method, 5 (9.25%) were negative by the RT-PCR method. According to the RT-PCR method, the sensitivity of the rapid antigen test test was 90.74%, and the specificity was 98.21%. Conclusion: Although the RT-PCR test is the gold standard method for COVID-19 detection, rapid antigen tests may be useful as a screening test or as a supportive test in diagnosis during periods of intense virus activity or epidemic situations.

Keywords

• COVID-19 diagnosis
• RT-PCR
• rapid antigen test

References

1. 1. Özlü T, Zorlu D. Current Threat: Novel Coronavirus Disease (-19) and Turkey Experience. ASYOD Current Chest Diseases Series Books. Ed: Karadağ M, et al. World Medical Bookstore. Ankara. 2021;26–33.
2. 2. van Boheemen S, de Graaf M, Lauber C, Bestebroer TM, Raj VS, Zaki AM, et al. Genomic characterization of a newly discovered coronavirus associated with acute respiratory distress syndrome in humans. mBio. 2012;3(6):e00473–12.
3. 3. Jin Y, Yang H, Ji W, Wu W, Chen S, Zhang W, et al. Virology, Epidemiology, Pathogenesis, and Control of COVID-19. Viruses [Internet]. 2020;12(4):372.
4. 4. Wölfel R, Corman VM, Guggemos W, Seilmaier M, Zange S, Müller MA, et al. Virological assessment of hospitalized patients with COVID-2019. Nature. 2020;581(7809):465–469.
5. 5. Hui KPY, Cheung MC, Perera RAPM, Ng KC, Bui CHT, Ho JCW. et al. Tropism, replication competence, and innate immune responses of the coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 in the human respiratory tract and conjunctiva: an analysis in ex-vivo and in-vitro cultures. Lancet Respir Med. 2020;8(7):687–695.
6. 6. Dinç F, Appak Ö, Sayıner A. COVID-19 microbiological diagnostic tests. Journal of Dokuz Eylul University Faculty of Medicine. 2021;35(Special Issue 1):55–69.
7. 7. European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control [Internet]. Options for the use of rapid antigen tests for COVID‐19 in the EU/EEA and the UK 19 November 2020 https://www. ecdc. europa. eu/sites/default/files/docum ents/Options‐use‐of‐rapid‐antigen‐tests‐for‐COVID‐ 19_0. pdf
8. 8. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention interim guidelines [Internet]. Using Antibody Tests for COVID‐19 https://www. cdc. gov/coronavirus/2019‐ ncov/lab/resources/antibody‐tests‐guidelines.

9. 9. Arabacı Ç, Aydın Tutak G, Eroğlu Kesim B, Ertürk B, Ak K, Ağaç E. The Characteristics of SARSCoV-2 Virus and Microbiological Diagnosis. Eur Arch Med Res. 2020;36(Suppl 1):10–20.
10. 10. World Health Organization Antigen-Detection in the Diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 Infection Using Rapid Immunoassays: Interim Guidance Available online: https://www. who. int/publications/i/item/antigen-detection-in-the-diagnosis-of-sars-cov-2infection-using-rapid-immunoassays
11. 11. İskit AT, Tanrıöver MD, COVID-19 Pandemic Report (20 March-20 November 2020); Hacettepe Internal Medicine Association Ankara, Türkiye; p. 41. http://hdl. handle. net/11655/23314.
12. 12. Li J, Ye G, Chen L, Wang J, Li Y. Analysis of false‐ negative results for 2019 novel coronavirus nucleic acid test and related countermeasures. Chinese J Laborat Med. 2020;43:E006.
13. 13. Watson J, Whiting PF, Brush JE. Interpreting a -19 test result. BMJ. 2020;369:m1808. Published 2020 May 12.
14. 14. Chaimayo C, Kaewnaphan B, Tanlieng N, Athipanyasilp N, Sirijatuphat R, Chayakulkeeree M, et al. Rapid SARS-CoV-2 antigen detection assay in comparison with real-time RT-PCR assay for laboratory diagnosis of COVID-19 in Thailand. Virol J. 2020;17(1):177.
15. 15. Torres I, Poujois S, Albert E, Álvarez G, Colomina J, Navarro D. Point-of-care evaluation of a rapid antigen test (CLINITEST® Rapid COVID-19 Antigen Test) for diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection in symptomatic and asymptomatic individuals. J Infect. 2021;82(5):e11–e12.
16. 16. Diao B, Wen K, Zhang J, Chen J, Han C, Chen Y, et al. Accuracy of a nucleocapsid protein antigen rapid test in the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2021;27(2):289. e1–289. e4.
17. 17. Ciotti M, Maurici M, Pieri M, Andreoni M, Bernardini S. Performance of a rapid antigen test in the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection. J Med Virol. 2021;93(5):2988–91.
18. 18. Krüttgen A, Cornelissen CG, Dreher M, Hornef MW, Imöhl M, Kleines M. Comparison of the SARS-CoV-2 Rapid antigen test to the real star Sars-CoV-2 RT PCR kit. J Virol Methods. 2021;288:114024.
19. 19. Chiu RYT, Kojima N, Mosley GL, Cheng KK, Pereira DY, Brobeck M, et al. Evaluation of the INDICAID COVID-19 Rapid Antigen Test in Symptomatic Populations and Asymptomatic Community Testing. Microbiol Spectr. 2021;9(1):e0034221.
20. 20. Jaaskelainen AE, Ahava MJ, Jokela P, Szirovicza L, Pohjala S, Vapalahti O, et al. Evaluation of three rapid lateral flow antigen detection tests for the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection. J Clin Virol. 2021;137:104785.