Evaluation of the specificity and accuracy of SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen self-tests compared to RT-PCR from 1015 asymptomatic volunteers
Iftner, T.; Iftner, A.; Pohle, D.; Martus, P.
Show abstract
ObjectiveEvaluation of the specificity and accuracy of four CE-approved SARS-CoV-2 antigen rapid self-tests (AG-ST) Anbio, Clungene, Hotgene and Mexacare. Method1015 asymptomatic volunteers were screened for SARS-CoV-2 by means of an oropharyngeal swab taken by qualified personnel and subsequent RT-PCR testing. Each participant additionally performed nasal self-swabs for two of the four rapid antigen tests at the same day according to the manufacturers instructions. Study participants transmitted a photo and own interpretation of their test results to the study center. The results of the two self-tests provided by the participants were correlated with the results of the SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR and independently assessed and evaluated by the study center. ResultsNone of the volunteers tested positive upon RT-PCR, whereas 13 AG-ST showed a false positive test result (0.7 %). The highest false positivity rate was found for the Clungene test (2.1 % compared to 0.2 % for the other tests), while the highest test failure rate (invalid) was found for the Mexacare test (3.7%). The Anbio and Hotgene tests produced the fewest false positive results when evaluated by the participants and also showed the best agreement among themselves. ConclusionSARS-CoV-2 Antigen rapid self-tests with higher false positive test rates, such as the Clungene test, or with high rates of invalid test results, such as the Mexacare test, are less suitable for screening purposes of asymptomatic study participants especially in low-prevalence settings. False positive or inadequate test results increase the burden on certified test laboratories due to verification PCR tests and cause a substantial economic loss due to unnecessary quarantine measurements and cause psychological stress in the affected study participants. In addition to earlier defined requirements for sensitivity for SARS-CoV-2 detection, a lower acceptance boundary for the false positivity rate of < 0.3% should be demanded.
Matching journals
The top 2 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Performance Evaluation Of A SARS-COV-2 Rapid Antigentest: Test Performance In The Community In The Netherlands 97%
- Evaluation of a novel, rapid antigen detection test for the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 96%
- Diagnostic accuracy of two commercial SARS-CoV-2 Antigen-detecting rapid tests at the point of care in community-based testing centers 96%
Similar papers in this journal
- Surveillance of acute SARS-CoV-2 infections in school children and point-prevalence during a time of high community transmission in Switzerland 93%
- SARS-CoV-2 viral clearance and viral load kinetics in young children (1-6 years) compared to adults: Results of a longitudinal study in Germany 92%
- SARS-CoV-2 surveillance (09/2020 - 03/2021) in elementary schools and daycare facilities in Bavaria 91%
Similar papers in this journal
- Clinical evaluation of an automated, rapid mariPOC ® antigen test in screening of symptomatics and asymptomatics for SARS-CoV-2 infections 97%
- Evaluation Of A New “All In One” Sars-Cov-2 Antigen-Detecting Rapid Diagnostic Test And Self-Test: Diagnostic Performance And Usability On Child And Adult Population 97%
- Real-life performance of a novel antigen detection test on nasopharyngeal specimens for SARS-CoV-2 infection diagnosis: a prospective study 96%
Similar papers in this journal
- Increasing both specificity and sensitivity of SARS-CoV-2 antibody tests by using an adaptive orthogonal testing approach 95%
- Development of a qualitative real-time RT-PCR assay for the detection of SARS-CoV-2: A guide and case study in setting up an emergency-use, laboratory-developed molecular assay 94%
- Clinical and laboratory characteristics in outpatient diagnosis of COVID-19 in healthcare professionals in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- Evaluation and modelling of the performance of an automated SARS-CoV-2 antigen assay according to sample type, target population and epidemic trends 95%
- Evaluation of commercial qPCR kits for detection of SARS-CoV-2 in pooled samples 95%
- Feasibility and diagnostic accuracy of saliva-based SARS-CoV-2 screening in educational settings and children aged < 12 years 94%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.