Validation of a rapid SARS-CoV-2 antibody test in general practice

Author:

Domen JulieORCID,Verbakel Jan Yvan JosORCID,Adriaenssens NielsORCID,Scholtes BeatriceORCID,Peeters Bart,Bruyndonckx RobinORCID,De Sutter AnORCID,Heytens StefanORCID,Van den Bruel AnnORCID,Desombere IsabelleORCID,Van Damme PierreORCID,Goossens HermanORCID,Buret LaetitiaORCID,Duysburgh ElsORCID,Coenen SamuelORCID

Abstract

ObjectivesTo validate a rapid serological test (RST) for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies used in seroprevalence studies in healthcare providers, including primary healthcare providers (PHCPs) in Belgium.DesignA phase III validation study of the RST (OrientGene) within a prospective cohort study.SettingPrimary care in Belgium.ParticipantsAny general practitioner (GP) working in primary care in Belgium and any other PHCP from the same GP practice who physically manages patients were eligible in the seroprevalence study. For the validation study, all participants who tested positive (376) on the RST at the first testing timepoint (T1) and a random sample of those who tested negative (790) and unclear (24) were included.InterventionAt T2, 4 weeks later, PHCPs performed the RST with fingerprick blood (index test) immediately after providing a serum sample to be analysed for the presence of SARS-CoV-2 immunoglobulin G antibodies using a two-out-of-three assay (reference test).Primary and secondary outcome measuresThe RST accuracy was estimated using inverse probability weighting to correct for missing reference test data, and considering unclear RST results as negative for the sensitivity and positive for the specificity. Using these conservative estimates, the true seroprevalence was estimated both for T2 and RST-based prevalence values found in a cohort study with PHCPs in Belgium.Results1073 paired tests (403 positive on the reference test) were included. A sensitivity of 73% (a specificity of 92%) was found considering unclear RST results as negative (positive). For an RST-based prevalence at T1 (13.9), T2 (24.9) and T7 (70.21), the true prevalence was estimated to be 9.1%, 25.9% and 95.7%, respectively.ConclusionThe RST sensitivity (73%) and specificity (92%) make an RST-based seroprevalence below (above) 23% overestimate (underestimate) the true seroprevalence.Trial registration numberNCT04779424.

Publisher

BMJ

Subject

General Medicine

Cited by 1 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

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