» Articles » PMID: 37187412

Clinical Evaluation of Anterior Nasal Cavity Swab Specimens by a Rapid Antigen Test Using a GLINE-2019-nCoV Ag Kit to Diagnose COVID-19

Abstract

The promising diagnostic performance of rapid antigen tests (RATs) using non-invasive anterior nasal (AN) swab specimens to diagnose COVID-19 has been reported. A large number of RATs are commercially available; however, the careful assessment of RATs is essential prior to their implementation in clinical practice. We evaluated the clinical performance of the GLINE-2019-nCoV Ag Kit as a RAT using AN swabs in a prospective, blinded study. Adult patients who visited outpatient departments and received SARS-CoV-2 tests between August 16 and September 8, 2022, were eligible for this study. Patients who were aged under 18 years and patients without appropriate specimens were excluded. Two sets of AN and nasopharyngeal (NP) swabs were collected from all patients. Each set of specimens was tested by the RAT and quantitative reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR). Of the 138 recruited patients, 84 were positive and 54 were negative by RT-qPCR using NP swabs. The positive agreement rate between RT-qPCR using NP swabs and RAT using AN swabs was 78.6% (95% confidence interval [CI], 68.3%-86.8%), the negative agreement rate was 98.1% (95% CI, 90.1%-99.9%), and the overall agreement rate was 86.2% (95% CI, 79.3%-91.5%), with a κ coefficient of 0.73. The positive agreement rate in the early phase (≤3 days from symptom onset) was >80%, but this fell to 50% in the late phase (≥4 days). This study demonstrates that the GLINE-2019-nCoV Ag Kit using AN swabs has good clinical performance and might be a reliable alternative method for diagnosing COVID-19.

References
1.
Waggoner J, Vos M, Tyburski E, Nguyen P, Ingersoll J, Miller C . Concordance of SARS-CoV-2 Results in Self-collected Nasal Swabs vs Swabs Collected by Health Care Workers in Children and Adolescents. JAMA. 2022; 328(10):935-940. PMC: 9419070. DOI: 10.1001/jama.2022.14877. View

2.
Shirato K, Nao N, Katano H, Takayama I, Saito S, Kato F . Development of Genetic Diagnostic Methods for Detection for Novel Coronavirus 2019(nCoV-2019) in Japan. Jpn J Infect Dis. 2020; 73(4):304-307. DOI: 10.7883/yoken.JJID.2020.061. View

3.
Xie J, He Y, Zheng Y, Wang M, Lin Y, Lin L . Diagnostic accuracy of rapid antigen test for SARS-CoV-2: A systematic review and meta-analysis of 166,943 suspected COVID-19 patients. Microbiol Res. 2022; 265:127185. PMC: 9461282. DOI: 10.1016/j.micres.2022.127185. View

4.
Lee J, Song J, Shim S . Comparing the diagnostic accuracy of rapid antigen detection tests to real time polymerase chain reaction in the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Clin Virol. 2021; 144:104985. PMC: 8444381. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcv.2021.104985. View

5.
Drain P . Rapid Diagnostic Testing for SARS-CoV-2. N Engl J Med. 2022; 386(3):264-272. PMC: 8820190. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMcp2117115. View