Rapid Antigen Test

Last updated:
Total hit(s): 5
Select item(s)
Key Findings
Comments
(You can add your comments too!)
Original Article
(hover to see details)
Compared to the SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR assay, the SARS-CoV-2 Rapid Antigen Test (Roche, Switzerland) showed less sensitivity and specificity. The Rapid Antigen test provided an advantage of quick detection of infected people.
✍
 		33227341
(J Virol Methods)
PMID
33227341
Date of Publishing: 2021 Feb
Title Comparision of the SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen test to real star SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR kit
Author(s) nameKrüttgen A, Cornelissen CG et al.
Journal J Virol Methods
Impact factor
1.76
Citation count: 60

In this study, the Rapid Antigen detection kit, STANDARD F COVID-19 Ag FIA (FIA), a fluorescent immunoassay, was evaluated for the rapid detection of SARS-CoV-2 nucleoprotein in PCR-positive and PCR-negative swab samples. The kit produced false-negative results, with overall clinical sensitivity and specificity of 45.4% and 97.8%, respectively. Prior storage of the specimen at -20°C slightly enhances the rate of SARS-CoV-2 antigen test.
Also the oropharyngeal can be used as an alternative sampling site for FIA.
✍
 		33452927
(Med Microbiol Immunol)
PMID
33452927
Date of Publishing: 2021 Jan 16
Title Evaluation of two rapid antigen tests to detect SARS-CoV-2 in a hospital setting
Author(s) nameOsterman A, Baldauf HM et al.
Journal Med Microbiol Immunol
Impact factor
6.7
Citation count: 30

In this study, the Rapid Antigen detection kit, Roche SARS-CoV-2 Rapid Antigen Test (RAT), a chromatographic immunoassay, was evaluated for the rapid detection of SARS-CoV-2 N protein in PCR-positive and PCR-negative swab samples. The kit produced false-negative results, with overall clinical sensitivity and specificity of 50.3% and 97.7%, respectively. RAT test was extensively flexible with the way samples were stored and used for testing.
The use of oropharyngeal sample as an alternative is not beneficial for RAT test.
✍
 		33452927
(Med Microbiol Immunol)
PMID
33452927
Date of Publishing: 2021 Jan 16
Title Evaluation of two rapid antigen tests to detect SARS-CoV-2 in a hospital setting
Author(s) nameOsterman A, Baldauf HM et al.
Journal Med Microbiol Immunol
Impact factor
6.7
Citation count: 30

In this study, a nucleocapsid protein antigen test, based on fluorescence immunochromatographic (FIC) assay, was evaluated for the rapid detection of SARS-CoV-2 N protein antigen. With RT-PCR assay as the reference standard, this assay detected SARS-CoV-2 infection in 10 minutes, with the sensitivity, specificity, and percentage agreement of 75.6%, 100%, and 80.5%, respectively. A few limitations of the test were as follows :
(i) Small sample size
(ii) Insufficient patient medical information
(iii) Only symptomatic individuals were included
✍
 		33031947
(Clin Microbiol Infect)
PMID
33031947
Date of Publishing: 2020 Oct 5
Title Accuracy of a nucleocapsid protein antigen rapid test in the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection
Author(s) nameDiao B, Wen K et al.
Journal Clin Microbiol Infect
Impact factor
6.17
Citation count: 67

In this study, the Rapid Antigen detection kit, the BIOCREDIT COVID-19 Ag, was evaluated for diagnosing the SARS-CoV-2 virus in respiratory samples and compared with RT-PCR assay. This method was found less sensitive than RT-PCR. The kit produced false-negative results, and hence this test cannot individually diagnose a COVID-19 positive patient. Positive results are shown by appearance of black line in the result window of the kit.
Two major limitations of the test were the viral load variability prior to the test and the refrigeration of the samples for a week before testing.
✍
 		32585619
(J Clin Virol)
PMID
32585619
Date of Publishing: 2020 Aug
Title Evaluation of rapid antigen test for detection of SARS-CoV-2 virus
Author(s) nameMak GC, Cheng PK et al.
Journal J Clin Virol
Impact factor
2.95
Citation count: 186