Table 1.
Comparison of Diagnostic Tests of COVID-19
Intended Use | Methods | Description | Operating Temperature | Analytical Sensitivity | Specificity | Assay time | Ref. |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
RT-qPCR |
|
Thermal cycling | 0.14 copy/μL | 96%–100% | 2–4 h | (Corman et al., 2020) |
ddPCR |
|
Thermal cycling | 0.02 copy/μL | 94.9% | 1 h | (Suo et al., 2020) | |
RT-LAMP |
|
60°C–65°C | 4.8 copy/μL | 99% | 15–60 min | (Zhang et al., 2020b) | |
RT-RPA |
|
37°C–42°C | 0.2 copy/μL | NA | 30 min | (Xia and Chen, 2020) | |
RT-NEAR |
|
55°C–59°C | 0.13 copy/μL | 100% | <15 min | (Abbott, 2020) | |
DETECTR |
|
62°C for RT-LAMP 37°C for LbCas12a |
10 copy/μL | PPV: 95% NPV: 100% |
30 min | (Broughton et al., 2020) | |
STOP |
|
60°C for RT-LAMP 60°C for AapCas12b |
2 copy/μL | 100% | 70 min | (Joung et al., 2020) | |
|
ELISA |
|
Ambient | 100 pg/mL | 99.3% | 3–5 h | (Freeman et al., 2020) |
|
RDT |
|
Ambient | Qualitative | 84.2%–100% | <15 min | (Liu et al., 2020c) |
ELISA |
|
Ambient | 100 pg/mL | 67%–98.6% | 3–5 h | (SinoBiological, 2020) | |
Neutralization test |
|
Ambient | 0.22 copy/μL | 100% | 2–3 days | (Tan et al., 2020) |
RT, reverse transcription; PCR, polymerase chain reaction; qPCR, quantitative PCR; ddPCR, digital droplet PCR; LAMP, loop-mediated isothermal amplification; RPA, recombinase polymerase amplification; NEAR, nicking endonuclease amplification reaction; DETECTR, DNA endonuclease-targeted CRISPR transreporter; STOP, SHERLOCK Testing in One Pot; NA, not available for clinical samples; PPV, positive predictive value; NPV, negative predictive value; ELISA, enzyme=linked immunoabsorbent assay; RDT, rapid diagnostic test.