» Articles » PMID: 35832707

Diagnostic Accuracy of Antibody-based Rapid Diagnostic Tests in Detecting Coronavirus Disease 2019: Systematic Review

Overview
Journal Arch Med Sci
Specialty General Medicine
Date 2022 Jul 14
PMID 35832707
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Introduction: The rapid transmission of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) requires a fast, accurate, and affordable detection method. Despite doubts of their diagnostic accuracy, rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) are used worldwide due to their practicality. This systematic review aims to determine the diagnostic accuracy of antibody-based RDTs in detecting COVID-19.

Material And Methods: A literature search was carried out on five journal databases using the PRISMA-P 2015 method. We included all studies published up to February 2021. The risk of bias was evaluated using the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Critical Appraisal Checklist for Diagnostic Test Accuracy Studies. Data regarding peer-review status, study design, test kit information, immunoglobulin class, target antigen, and the number of samples were extracted and tabulated. We estimated the pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) with a 95% confidence interval.

Results: Thirty-three studies met the eligibility criteria. The pooled data results showed that the combined detection method of IgM or IgG had the highest sensitivity and NPV, which were 73.41% (95% CI: 72.22-74.57) and 75.34% (95% CI: 74.51-76.16), respectively. The single IgG detection method had the highest specificity and PPV of 96.68% (95% CI: 96.25-97.07) and 95.97% (95% CI: 95.47-96.42%), respectively.

Conclusions: Antibody-based RDTs are not satisfactory as primary diagnostic tests but have utility as a screening tool.

Citing Articles

Rapid assays of SARS-CoV-2 virus and noble biosensors by nanomaterials.

Liu Y, Li Y, Hang Y, Wang L, Wang J, Bao N Nano Converg. 2024; 11(1):2.

PMID: 38190075 PMC: 10774473. DOI: 10.1186/s40580-023-00408-z.


An update on lateral flow immunoassay for the rapid detection of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies.

Spicuzza L, Campagna D, Di Maria C, Sciacca E, Mancuso S, Vancheri C AIMS Microbiol. 2023; 9(2):375-401.

PMID: 37091823 PMC: 10113162. DOI: 10.3934/microbiol.2023020.


Antibody tests for identification of current and past infection with SARS-CoV-2.

Fox T, Geppert J, Dinnes J, Scandrett K, Bigio J, Sulis G Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022; 11():CD013652.

PMID: 36394900 PMC: 9671206. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013652.pub2.

References
1.
Serre-Miranda C, Nobrega C, Roque S, Canto-Gomes J, Silva C, Vieira N . Performance assessment of 11 commercial serological tests for SARS-CoV-2 on hospitalised COVID-19 patients. Int J Infect Dis. 2021; 104:661-669. PMC: 7817432. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijid.2021.01.038. View

2.
Nicol T, Lefeuvre C, Serri O, Pivert A, Joubaud F, Dubee V . Assessment of SARS-CoV-2 serological tests for the diagnosis of COVID-19 through the evaluation of three immunoassays: Two automated immunoassays (Euroimmun and Abbott) and one rapid lateral flow immunoassay (NG Biotech). J Clin Virol. 2020; 129:104511. PMC: 7295485. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcv.2020.104511. View

3.
Candel F, Vinuela-Prieto J, Gonzalez Del Castillo J, Barreiro Garcia P, Fragiel Saavedra M, Hernandez Piriz A . Utility of lateral flow tests in SARS-CoV-2 infection monitorization. Rev Esp Quimioter. 2020; 33(4):258-266. PMC: 7374028. DOI: 10.37201/req/052.2020. View

4.
de Almeida S, Spalanzani R, Nogueira M, Sanada B, Cavalli B, Rotta I . Rapid Serological Tests for SARS-CoV-2: Diagnostic Performance of 4 Commercial Assays. Med Princ Pract. 2021; 30(4):385-394. PMC: 8339017. DOI: 10.1159/000516776. View

5.
Adams E, Ainsworth M, Anand R, Andersson M, Auckland K, Baillie J . Antibody testing for COVID-19: A report from the National COVID Scientific Advisory Panel. Wellcome Open Res. 2021; 5:139. PMC: 7941096. DOI: 10.12688/wellcomeopenres.15927.1. View