Evaluation of the performance of a quantitative point-of-care CRP test
Ellis, J. E.; Macluskie, S.; Craig, D.; Lehane, L.; Mcinnes, G.; Harnett, J.; Cameron, G.; Moss, P.; Gray, A.
Show abstract
IntroductionC-reactive protein (CRP) is an established acute-phase marker for infection and inflammation, which can help guide clinical decision-making in primary and secondary care. Many European guidelines recommend point-of-care (POC) CRP testing to improve antimicrobial stewardship in primary care. This performance evaluation study assessed the equivalence of the quantitative POC LumiraDx CRP Test compared to a laboratory-based reference method. MethodsMethod comparison, matrix equivalency, and precision were evaluated. Plasma samples from secondary care patients presenting with symptoms of infection or inflammation were analyzed centrally using the LumiraDx CRP Test and the reference test (Siemens CRP Extended Range for Dimension(R) Clinical Chemistry System). The method comparison was conducted used Passing-Bablok regression analysis with prespecified criteria of r[≥]95 and a slope of 0.95-1.05. The REACT study (NCT05180110) evaluated the equivalence and precision of the testing modalities (fingerstick, venous blood, and plasma samples from the same secondary care patient) using Passing-Bablok regression analysis of the results of the POC LumiraDx CRP Test. ResultsIn analysis of 320 plasma samples from 110 patients, the POC LumiraDx CRP Test demonstrated close agreement with the reference method, meeting the prespecified performance criteria (r=0.99, slope of 1.05, N=110). Paired replicate precision of the testing modalities was high, with mean %CV of 6.4 (plasma), 6.6 (capillary direct), and 8.1 (venous blood). Passing-Bablok regression showed matrix equivalency for all replicate pairs of the testing modalities, with r values across all sample types of 0.97-0.98. ConclusionThe quantitative POC LumiraDx CRP Test showed very close agreement with the established laboratory-based test when using capillary blood, venous blood, or plasma. The use of capillary blood testing in particular is beneficial in both primary and secondary care, with this portable test system providing rapid quantitative results within 4 minutes, potentiating the ability to help guide clinical decision-making. Data from two study collections, the NOVEL study and the REACT study with a trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT05180110, were used in this performance evaluation. Key summary pointsO_LIC-reactive protein (CRP) measurements are clinical markers for infection and inflammation, commonly used in primary and secondary care C_LIO_LIPoint-of-care (POC) CRP testing can assist primary care clinicians in making an immediate decision as to whether to prescribe antibiotics while the patient is still at the clinic C_LIO_LIPOC CRP testing that provides quantitative results near to the patient can be useful in emergency care assessment of patients and in hospital monitoring of antibiotic therapy C_LIO_LIThe POC LumiraDx CRP Test has demonstrated quantitative results comparable to those obtained using a recognized laboratory system using plasma C_LIO_LIThe POC LumiraDx CRP Test has also demonstrated matrix equivalence of capillary blood (both direct application and transfer tube), venous blood, and plasma C_LI
Matching journals
The top 7 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Analytical performance of 17 commercially available point-of-care tests for CRP to support patient management at lower levels of the health system 98%
- Evaluation of SARS-CoV-2 Antibody Point of Care Devices in the Laboratory and Clinical Setting 96%
- A High-throughput Microsphere-based Immunoassay of Anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgM Testing for COVID-19 Diagnostics 95%
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- Acceptable Performance of the Abbott ID NOW Among Symptomatic Individuals with Confirmed COVID-19 94%
- Evaluation of the ID NOW Among Symptomatic Individuals During the Omicron Wave 92%
- Evaluation of sample collection and transport strategies to enhance yield, accessibility, and biosafety of COVID-19 RT-PCR testing 91%
Similar papers in this journal
- Screening for SARS-CoV-2 infection in asymptomatic individuals using the Panbio™ COVID-19 Antigen Rapid Test (Abbott) compared to RT-qPCR 92%
- Meta-Analysis of Robustness of COVID-19 Diagnostic Kits During Early Pandemic 92%
- Prevalence and Incidence of Antibodies Against Sars-Cov-2 Among Primary Healthcare Providers in Belgium During One Year of the Covid-19 Epidemic: Prospective Cohort Study Protocol 91%
Similar papers in this journal
- Hilab system, a new point-of-care hematology analyzer supported by the Internet of Things and Artificial Intelligence 95%
- Are commercial antibody assays substantially underestimating SARS-CoV-2 ever infection? An analysis on a population-based sample in a high exposure setting 93%
- A serological assay to detect SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in at-home collected finger-prick dried blood spots 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.