Comparative sensitivity evaluation for 122 CE-marked rapid diagnostic tests for SARS-CoV-2 antigen, Germany, September 2020 to April 2021

Author:

Scheiblauer Heinrich1,Filomena Angela1,Nitsche Andreas2,Puyskens Andreas2,Corman Victor M34,Drosten Christian4,Zwirglmaier Karin5,Lange Constanze6,Emmerich Petra7,Müller Michael8,Knauer Olivia1,Nübling C Micha1ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Testing Laboratory for In-vitro Diagnostic Medical Devices, Paul-Ehrlich-Institute, Langen, Germany

2. Robert Koch Institute, Highly Pathogenic Viruses, Centre for Biological Threats and Special Pathogens, WHO Reference Laboratory for SARS-CoV-2 and WHO Collaborating Centre for Emerging Infections and Biological Threats, Robert Koch Institute, Berlin, Germany

3. Labor Berlin, Charité - Vivantes GmbH, Berlin, Germany

4. Charité – Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Institute of Virology and German Centre for Infection Research (DZIF), Associated Partner Site, Berlin, Germany

5. Bundeswehr Institute of Microbiology, and German Centre for Infection Research (DZIF), Partner Site, Munich, Germany

6. LADR Central Laboratory Dr. Kramer & Colleagues, Geesthacht, Germany

7. Bernhard-Nocht Institute, Department of Virology, Hamburg, and Department of Tropical Medicine and Infectious Diseases, Center of Internal Medicine II, University of Rostock, Rostock, Germany

8. MVZ Labor 28 GmbH, Berlin, Germany

Abstract

Introduction Numerous CE-marked SARS-CoV-2 antigen rapid diagnostic tests (Ag RDT) are offered in Europe, several of them with unconfirmed quality claims. Aim We performed an independent head-to-head evaluation of the sensitivity of SARS-CoV-2 Ag RDT offered in Germany. Methods We addressed the sensitivity of 122 Ag RDT in direct comparison using a common evaluation panel comprised of 50 specimens. Minimum sensitivity of 75% for panel specimens with a PCR quantification cycle (Cq) ≤ 25 was used to identify Ag RDT eligible for reimbursement in the German healthcare system. Results The sensitivity of different SARS-CoV-2 Ag RDT varied over a wide range. The sensitivity limit of 75% for panel members with Cq ≤ 25 was met by 96 of the 122 tests evaluated; 26 tests exhibited lower sensitivity, few of which failed completely. Some RDT exhibited high sensitivity, e.g. 97.5 % for Cq < 30. Conclusions This comparative evaluation succeeded in distinguishing less sensitive from better performing Ag RDT. Most of the evaluated Ag RDT appeared to be suitable for fast identification of acute infections associated with high viral loads. Market access of SARS-CoV-2 Ag RDT should be based on minimal requirements for sensitivity and specificity.

Publisher

European Centre for Disease Control and Prevention (ECDC)

Subject

Virology,Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health,Epidemiology

Reference28 articles.

1. Clinical performance evaluation of SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen testing in point of care usage in comparison to RT-qPCR.;Wagenhäuser;EBioMedicine,2021

2. Accuracy of novel antigen rapid diagnostics for SARS-CoV-2: A living systematic review and meta-analysis.;Brümmer;PLoS Med,2021

3. European Commission. Directive 98/79/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 October 1998 on in vitro diagnostic medical devices. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union; 1998. 7.12.98:L331/1EN. Available from: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:31998L0079&from=DE

4. In vitro diagnostics for screening the blood supply: the new European regulation for IVD and the WHO IVD prequalification programme.;Mbunkah;Vox Sang,2021

5. European Commission. Regulation (EU) 2017/746 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 April 2017 on in vitro diagnostic medical devices and repealing Directive 98/79/EC and Commission Decision 2010/227/EU. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union; 2017. 5.5.2017:L 117/176. Available from: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2017/746/oj

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3