Steinlin-Schopfer Jacqueline, Barbani Maria Teresa, Kamgang Richard, Zwahlen Martina, Suter-Riniker Franziska, Dijkman Ronald
Institute for Infectious Diseases, University of Bern, Friedbühlstrasse 51, 3001 Bern, Switzerland.
Institute of Virology and Immunology, Bern & Mittelhäusern, Switzerland.
J Clin Virol Plus. 2021 Jun;1(1):100020. doi: 10.1016/j.jcvp.2021.100020. Epub 2021 May 9.
The most sensitive method to detect SARS-CoV-2 relies on rRT-PCR; however, viral RNA can be detected weeks/months after clinical resolution. Since rRT-PCR cannot discern between non- and infectious virus, it is unclear whether the presence of viral RNA after recovery reflects infectious SARS-CoV-2. However, recent studies suggest a positive correlation between antigen rapid tests (Ag-RDT) and virus isolation that is more suited to assess contagiousness.
To assess the utility of SARS-CoV-2 diagnostic tests in different settings we evaluated the performance of Ag-RDT-based and a cell culture-based SARS-CoV-2 assay in comparison to rRT-PCR.
A total of 61 Nasopharyngeal-Swabs tested positive by cobas SARS-CoV-2 rRT-PCR were in parallel evaluated with the Roche Ag-RDT and a cell culture-based assay to detect SARS-CoV-2.
SARS-CoV-2 was successfully isolated in 51/61 samples corresponding to 83.6%, which was 97.3% or 96.2% when considering samples with E-gene Ct-value <25 and <28, respectively. In comparison, the Ag-RDT showed an overall sensitivity of 85.2%, that increased to 100% and 96.2% using an E-gene Ct-value cut-off of <25 and <28, respectively. There was an overall good agreement between the commercial Ag-RDT and our in-house cell culture-based SARS-CoV-2 detection assay. However, SARS-CoV-2 could be isolated from two samples that tested negative by Ag-RDT.
Our results support the use of the Roche Ag-RDT to detect SARS-CoV-2 exposure in large scale populations. However, it is recommended to use rRT-PCR, potentially in conjunction with cell culture-based SARS-CoV-2 assay, to support clinicians in making decisions regarding fragile patient groups.
检测严重急性呼吸综合征冠状病毒2(SARS-CoV-2)最灵敏的方法依赖于逆转录实时荧光定量聚合酶链反应(rRT-PCR);然而,在临床症状消退数周/数月后仍可检测到病毒RNA。由于rRT-PCR无法区分非感染性病毒和感染性病毒,因此尚不清楚康复后病毒RNA的存在是否反映了具有传染性的SARS-CoV-2。然而,最近的研究表明,抗原快速检测(Ag-RDT)与病毒分离之间存在正相关,而病毒分离更适合评估传染性。
为了评估SARS-CoV-2诊断检测在不同情况下的效用,我们将基于Ag-RDT和基于细胞培养的SARS-CoV-2检测方法与rRT-PCR进行比较,评估了它们的性能。
对61份经cobas SARS-CoV-2 rRT-PCR检测呈阳性的鼻咽拭子,同时采用罗氏Ag-RDT和基于细胞培养的检测方法检测SARS-CoV-2。
61份样本中有51份成功分离出SARS-CoV-2,占83.6%;当考虑E基因Ct值<25和<28的样本时,这一比例分别为97.3%和96.2%。相比之下,Ag-RDT的总体灵敏度为85.2%,当E基因Ct值临界值分别设为<25和<28时,灵敏度分别提高到100%和96.2%。商用Ag-RDT与我们内部基于细胞培养的SARS-CoV-2检测方法总体一致性良好。然而,从两份Ag-RDT检测呈阴性的样本中分离出了SARS-CoV-2。
我们的结果支持使用罗氏Ag-RDT在大规模人群中检测SARS-CoV-2感染。然而,建议使用rRT-PCR,可能结合基于细胞培养的SARS-CoV-2检测方法,以帮助临床医生对脆弱患者群体做出决策。