Clinical Performance of Rapid and Point-of-Care Antigen Tests for SARS-CoV-2 Variants of Concern: A Living Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

被引:15
作者
Kim, Jimin [1 ]
Sung, Heungsup [2 ]
Lee, Hyukmin [3 ]
Kim, Jae-Seok [4 ]
Shin, Sue [5 ]
Jeong, Seri [6 ]
Choi, Miyoung [1 ]
Lee, Hyeon-Jeong [1 ]
机构
[1] Natl Evidence Based Healthcare Collaborating Agcy, Div Healthcare Technol Assessment Res, 400 Neungdong Ro, Seoul 04933, South Korea
[2] Univ Ulsan, Asan Med Ctr, Dept Lab Med, Coll Med, 88 Olymp Ro 43 Gil, Seoul 05505, South Korea
[3] Yonsei Univ, Dept Lab Med, Coll Med, 50-1 Yonsei Ro, Seoul 03722, South Korea
[4] Hallym Univ, Kangdong Sacred Heart Hosp, Dept Lab Med, Coll Med, 150 Seongan Ro, Seoul 05355, South Korea
[5] Seoul Natl Univ, Dept Lab Med, Seoul Metropolitan Govt, Boramae Med Ctr, 20 Boramae Ro 5 Gil, Seoul 07061, South Korea
[6] Hallym Univ, Kangnam Sacred Heart Hosp, Dept Lab Med, Coll Med, 1 Singil Ro, Seoul 07441, South Korea
来源
VIRUSES-BASEL | 2022年 / 14卷 / 07期
基金
新加坡国家研究基金会;
关键词
SARS-CoV-2; COVID-19; variant; rapid antigen test; performance; DIAGNOSTIC-TEST ACCURACY;
D O I
10.3390/v14071479
中图分类号
Q93 [微生物学];
学科分类号
071005 ; 100705 ;
摘要
Rapid antigen tests (RATs) for detecting severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) are widely used in the Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic caused by diverse variants. Information on the real-world performance of RATs for variants is urgently needed for decision makers. Systematic searches of the available literature and updates were conducted in PubMed, Ovid-MEDLINE, Ovid-EMBASE, CENTRAL, and KMBASE for articles evaluating the accuracy of instrument-free RATs for variants up until 14 March 2022. A bivariate random effects model was utilized to calculate pooled diagnostic values in comparison with real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction as the reference test. A total of 7562 samples from six studies were available for the meta-analysis. The overall pooled sensitivity and specificity of RATs for variants were 69.7% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 62.5% to 76.1%) and 100.0% (95% CI = 98.8% to 100.0%), respectively. When an additional 2179 samples from seven studies reporting sensitivities only were assessed, the pooled sensitivity dropped to 50.0% (95% CI = 44.0% to 55.0%). These findings suggest reassessment and monitoring of the diagnostic utility of RATs for variants, especially for the sensitivity aspect, to facilitate appropriate diagnosis and management of COVID-19 patients.
引用
收藏
页数:17
相关论文
共 58 条
[1]   Field performance evaluation of the PanBio rapid SARS-CoV-2 antigen assay in an epidemic driven by the B.1.351 variant in the Eastern Cape, South Africa [J].
Akingba, Oluwakemi Laguda ;
Sprong, Kaitlin ;
Marais, Gert ;
Hardie, Diana Ruth .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL VIROLOGY PLUS, 2021, 1 (1-2)
[2]  
[Anonymous], NERVTAG SPI M EXTR M
[3]  
[Anonymous], COVID 19 LIV GUID
[4]  
[Anonymous], SARS COV 2 VAR CONC
[5]  
[Anonymous], WHO COR COVID 19 DAS
[6]  
[Anonymous], CDC COVID DATA TRACK
[7]  
[Anonymous], CRIT REL COVID 19 PA
[8]  
[Anonymous], ANT TEST GUID
[9]  
[Anonymous], KCDC COR COVID 19 DA
[10]   Diagnostic Accuracy of Rapid Antigen Tests for COVID-19 Detection: A Systematic Review With Meta-analysis [J].
Arshadi, Maniya ;
Fardsanei, Fatemeh ;
Deihim, Behnaz ;
Farshadzadeh, Zahra ;
Nikkhahi, Farhad ;
Khalili, Farima ;
Sotgiu, Giovanni ;
Bonjar, Amir Hashem Shahidi ;
Centis, Rosella ;
Migliori, Giovanni Battista ;
Nasiri, Mohammad Javad ;
Mirsaeidi, Mehdi .
FRONTIERS IN MEDICINE, 2022, 9