Diagnostic technology for COVID-19: comparative evaluation of antigen and serology-based SARS-CoV-2 immunoassays, and contact tracing solutions for potential use as at-home products

As the United States prepares to return to work and open up the economy in the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic without an available vaccine or effective therapy, testing and contact tracing are essential to contain and limit the spread of the COVID-19 virus. In response to the urgent public health need for accurate, effective, low-cost, and scalable COVID-19 testing technology, we evaluated and identified diagnostic solutions with potential for use as an at-home product. We conducted a deep horizon scan for antigen and serology-based diagnostics and down-selected to the most promising technologies. A total of 303 candidate products (138 antibody and 44 antigen tests) were identified. Product evaluations were based entirely on company-provided data. 73 serology-based antibody tests passing an initial scoring algorithm based on specificity and sensitivity data were then further evaluated using a second scoring algorithm. This second algorithm included a review of additional technical specifications of the devices, an analysis of supply chain, manufacturing, and distribution capacity of each vendor. 24 potential antibody products met the selection criteria for further direct laboratory evaluation. The performance metrics for selection of these 24 products are currently being evaluated in a Mass General Brigham laboratory. Testing alone might not be sufficient to prevent the spread of a highly contagious disease like COVID-19. Manual contact tracing could complement testing, but it is likely to fail in identifying many individuals who were in contact with a given COVID patient. The proliferation of smartphones in the population has enabled the development of solutions that can provide public health officials with valuable information for rapid and accurate contact tracing. Besides, electronic-based contact tracing solutions can be augmented by symptom self-reports gathered using electronic patient reported outcome (ePRO) platforms and by physiological data collected using wearable sensors. We performed a detailed assessment of 12 ePRO solutions, 27 wearable sensors, and 44 electronic-based contact tracing solutions. These technologies were evaluated using criteria developed to assess their suitability to address the COVID-19 pandemic. We identified a number of solutions that could augment if not provide a more effective alternative to manual contact tracing. Finally, we propose a theoretical framework in which ePRO platforms, wearable sensors, and electronic-based contact tracing solutions would be utilized in combination with molecular and serological tests to identify and isolate COVID-19 cases rapidly.