Predicting Direct-Specimen SARS-CoV-2 Assay Performance Using Residual Patient Samples

Abstract

Background

Diagnostic sensitivities of point-of-care SARS-CoV-2 assays depend on specimen type and population-specific viral loads. Evaluation of these assays require ‘direct’ specimens from paired-swab studies rather than more accessible residual specimens in viral transport media (VTM).

Methods

Residual VTM and limit-of-detection studies were conducted on Abbott ID NOW™ COVID-19, Quidel Sofia 2™ SARS Antigen FIA, and DiaSorin Simplexa™ COVID-19 Direct assays, with cycle threshold (CT) adjustments to approximate direct-specimen testing based on gene-target doubling each PCR cycle. Logistic regression was used to model assay performance by specimen CT. These models were applied to CT distributions of symptomatic and asymptomatic populations presenting to emergency services to predict the percent of specimens that would be detected by each assay. A 96-sample paired-swab study was conducted to confirm model results.

Results

When using direct nasopharyngeal samples and fit with either VTM or limit-of-detection data, percent positivities for ID NOW (symptomatic 94.9%/97.4%; asymptomatic 88.4.0%/89.6%) and Simplexa (symptomatic 97.8%/97.2%; asymptomatic 91.1%/90.8%) were predicted to be similar. Likewise, fit with VTM data, percent positivities for ID NOW with direct nasal specimens (symptomatic 77.8%; asymptomatic 64.5%) and Sofia 2 with direct nasopharyngeal specimens (symptomatic 76.6%, asymptomatic 60.3%) were similar. The paired-swab study comparing direct nasopharyngeal specimens on ID NOW and nasopharyngeal VTM specimens on Simplexa showed 99% concordance.

Conclusions

Assay performance can be modeled as dependent on viral load, fit using laboratory bench study results, and adjusted to account for direct-specimen testing. When using nasopharyngeal specimens, direct testing on Abbott ID NOW and VTM testing on DiaSorin Simplexa have similar performance.