Performance study of a point-of-care antigen test during the SARS-CoV-2 Delta to Omicron variant transition in the USA
Drain, P. K.; Chiklis, G.; Guest, P.; Lindner, N. M.; Ellis, J. E.
Show abstract
IntroductionConcerns have been raised regarding the accuracy of diagnostic antigen testing for the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) Omicron variant. We compared the performance of the LumiraDx SARS-CoV-2 Antigen Test between symptomatic participants recruited prospectively during the Delta to Omicron variant transition in the USA. MethodsTwo paired anterior nasal swabs were collected from each participant (adults and children) within 12 days of symptom onset between November 24th, 2021 and February 1st, 2022, during which time Omicron replaced Delta as the dominant variant in the sample population. Swabs were tested by the LumiraDx SARS-CoV-2 Antigen Test and compared using real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) reference testing. Reference samples identified as positive were sequenced to identify the SARS-CoV-2 variant. Positive percent agreement (PPA) was calculated, with results stratified by RT-PCR cycle threshold (Ct). ResultsOf the 38 participants for whom LumiraDx SARS-CoV-2 Antigen Test results were available, 36 were confirmed positive by RT-PCR. Overall, PPA of the LumiraDx SARS-CoV-2 Antigen Test was 94.7% (95% confidence interval: 82.3%, 99.4%) and PPA was 100% for samples with a Ct <33. Sufficient viral load for sequencing was present in nine samples (six Delta, three Omicron), all of which returned a positive result using the LumiraDx SARS-CoV-2 Antigen Test. There were no performance differences observed between participants with the Delta and Omicron variants. ConclusionsSARS-CoV-2 differences between Delta and Omicron variant mutations did not affect the performance of the LumiraDx SARS-CoV-2 Antigen Test which detects the nucleocapsid protein antigen. The LumiraDx SARS-CoV-2 Antigen Test can be a useful antigen test to diagnose emerging variants of coronavirus disease 2019.
Matching journals
The top 8 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Laboratory and field evaluation of the STANDARD Q and Panbio™ SARS-CoV-2 antigen rapid test in Namibia using nasopharyngeal samples 97%
- Validation of Reduced S-gene Target Performance and Failure for Rapid Surveillance of SARS-CoV-2 Variants 96%
- Performance Evaluation Of A SARS-COV-2 Rapid Antigentest: Test Performance In The Community In The Netherlands 96%
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- The evaluation of a newly developed antigen test (QuickNavi™-COVID19 Ag) for SARS-CoV-2: A prospective observational study in Japan 96%
- Evaluation and clinical implications of the time to a positive results of antigen testing for SARS-CoV-2 96%
- Clinical Evaluation of a Combo Rapid Antigen Test QuickNavi-Flu+COVID19 Ag for Simultaneous Detection of SARS-CoV-2 and Influenza Viruses 96%
Similar papers in this journal
- Field performance evaluation of the PanBio rapid SARS-CoV-2 antigen assay in an epidemic driven by 501Y.v2 (lineage B.1.351) in the Eastern Cape, South Africa 96%
- Evaluation of the Cepheid Xpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2 test for bronchoalveolar lavage 96%
- Comparison of SARS-CoV-2 serological assays for use in epidemiological surveillance in Scotland 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- Evaluation of six commercial SARS-CoV-2 Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent assays for clinical testing and serosurveillance 95%
- Evaluation of a Commercial Culture-free Neutralization Antibody Detection Kit for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome-Related Coronavirus-2 and Comparison with an Anti-RBD ELISA Assay 93%
- Respiratory Syncytial virus Strain Evolution and Mutations in Western Australia in the Context of Nirsevimab Prophylaxis 93%
"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.