Clinical Assessment of the Roche SARS-CoV-2 Rapid Antigen Test

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Giuseppe Lippi ◽  
Gianluca Gianfilippi ◽  
Damiano Bragantini ◽  
Brandon Henry ◽  
Gian Luca Salvagno
Diagnosis ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 0 (0) ◽  
Author(s):  
Gian Luca Salvagno ◽  
Gianluca Gianfilippi ◽  
Damiano Bragantini ◽  
Brandon M. Henry ◽  
Giuseppe Lippi

Abstract Objectives Novel point-of-care antigen assays present a promising opportunity for rapid screening of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infections. The purpose of this study was the clinical assessment of the new Roche SARS-CoV-2 Rapid Antigen Test. Methods The clinical performance of Roche SARS-CoV-2 Rapid Antigen Test was evaluated vs. a reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) laboratory-based assay (Seegene AllplexTM2019-nCoV) in nasopharyngeal swabs collected from a series of consecutive patients referred for SARS-CoV-2 diagnostics to the Pederzoli Hospital (Peschiera del Garda, Verona, Italy) over a 2-week period. Results The final study population consisted of 321 consecutive patients (mean age, 46 years and IQR, 32–56 years; 181 women, 56.4%), with 149/321 (46.4%) positive for SARS-CoV-2 RNA via the Seegene AllplexTM2019-nCoV Assay, and 109/321 (34.0%) positive with Roche SARS-CoV-2 Rapid Antigen Test, respectively. The overall accuracy of Roche SARS-CoV-2 Rapid Antigen Test compared to molecular testing was 86.9%, with 72.5% sensitivity and 99.4% specificity. Progressive decline in performance was observed as cycle threshold (Ct) values of different SARS-CoV-2 gene targets increased. The sensitivity was found to range between 97–100% in clinical samples with Ct values <25, between 50–81% in those with Ct values between 25 and <30, but low as 12–18% in samples with Ct values between 30 and <37. Conclusions The clinical performance of Roche SARS-CoV-2 Rapid Antigen Test is excellent in nasopharyngeal swabs with Ct values <25, which makes it a reliable screening test in patients with high viral load. However, mass community screening would require the use of more sensitive techniques.


2006 ◽  
Vol 175 (4S) ◽  
pp. 193-193 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul Hadway ◽  
Cathy M. Corbishley ◽  
Matthew Perry ◽  
Nicholas A. Watkin

2004 ◽  
Vol 171 (4S) ◽  
pp. 54-54
Author(s):  
Christina Kim ◽  
Steven G. Docimo ◽  
Kathleen McKay ◽  
Paige Corral ◽  
Judith Bell ◽  
...  

1967 ◽  
Vol 12 (5) ◽  
pp. 282, 284
Author(s):  
RALPH HEINE
Keyword(s):  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document