Clinical performance evaluation of the Sofia RSV FIA rapid antigen test for diagnosis of respiratory syncytial virus infection

Burden of respiratory syncytial virus in older adults in Taiwan: An expert perspective on knowledge gaps

The burden of respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) infection among older adults in Taiwan is not well understood due to a scarcity of published epidemiological data. Nonetheless, the increasing proportion of older adults is anticipated to translate to increased burden of RSV infection, presenting a challenge to the healthcare system. Thus, an expert meeting was convened among a panel of infectious disease specialists from Taiwan to evaluate the existing local evidence and data gaps related to RSV infection in older adults (aged ≥50 years), and propose steps to generating evidence on disease burden among this population. Overall, there are few studies on the clinical and economic burden of RSV infection in Taiwan, and existing data are limited by small sample sizes and highly selected populations. Inconsistent RSV testing practices among older adults contribute to under-diagnosis and under-reporting, driven by limitations to reimbursement policies that discourage proactive RSV testing in older adults, and the lack of appropriate, targeted RSV treatment. Crucially, the paucity of epidemiological data may perpetuate a lack of awareness of RSV among clinicians and the public, hinder investments into RSV testing at a policymaker level, and thereby impede implementation of consistent diagnostic practices, precluding a deeper understanding of RSV. To overcome these challenges, it is imperative to prioritize generation of epidemiological data to establish the burden of RSV infection among older adults in Taiwan. Such data would also support a multi-stakeholder group in assessing the impact of future RSV-related interventions, such as educational initiatives and preventative strategies including vaccines.

Development and Efficacy of Lateral Flow Point-of-Care Testing Devices for Rapid and Mass COVID-19 Diagnosis by the Detections of SARS-CoV-2 Antigen and Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Antibodies

The COVID-19 pandemic is an ongoing global pandemic caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in 2020-2021. COVID-19 is becoming one of the most fatal pandemics in history and brings a huge challenge to the global healthcare system. Opportune detection, confinement, and early treatment of infected cases present the first step in combating COVID-19. Diagnosis via viral nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) is frequently employed and considered the standard procedure. However, with an increasing urge for point-of-care tests, rapid and cheaper immunoassays are widely utilized, such as lateral flow immunoassay (LFIA), which can be used for rapid, early, and large-scale detection of SARS-CoV-2 infection. In this narrative review, the principle and technique of LFIA applied in COVID-19 antigen and antibody detection are introduced. The diagnostic sensitivity and specificity of the commercial LFIA tests are outlined and compared. Generally, LFIA antigen tests for SARS-CoV-2 are less sensitive than viral NAATs, the "gold standard" for clinical COVID-19 diagnosis. However, antigen tests can be used for rapid and mass testing in high-risk congregate housing to quickly identify people with COVID-19, implementing infection prevention and control measures, thus preventing transmission. LFIA anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody tests, IgM and/or IgG, known as serology tests, are used for identification if a person has previously been exposed to the virus or vaccine immunization. Notably, advanced techniques, such as LFT-based CRISPR-Cas9 and surface-enhanced Raman spectroscopy (SERS), have added new dimensions to the COVID-19 diagnosis and are also discussed in this review.

Molecular Diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2: Assessing and Interpreting Nucleic Acid and Antigen Tests

In this review, we summarize the current status of nucleic acid and antigen testing required for diagnosing SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 disease. Nucleic acid amplification (NAAT) and antigen-detection (Ag) tests occupy a critically important frontline of defense against SARS-CoV-2 in clinical and public health settings. In early stages of this outbreak, we observed that identifying the causative agent of a new illness of unknown origin was greatly accelerated by characterizing the nucleic acid signature of the novel coronavirus. Results from nucleic acid sequencing led to the development of highly sensitive RT-PCR testing for use in clinical settings and to informing best practices for patient care, and in public health settings to the development of strategies for protecting populations. As the current COVID-19 pandemic has evolved, we have seen how NAAT performance has been used to guide and optimize specimen collection, inform patient triage decisions, reveal unexpected clinical symptoms, clarify risks of transmission within patient care facilities, and guide appropriate treatment strategies. For public health settings during the earliest stages of the pandemic, NAATs served as the only tool available for studying the epidemiology of this new disease by identifying infected individuals, studying transmission patterns, modeling population impacts, and enabling disease control organizations and governments to make challenging disease mitigation recommendations to protect the expanding breadth of populations at risk. With time, the nucleic acid signature has provided the information necessary to understand SARS-CoV-2 protein expression for further development of antigen-based point-of-care (POC) diagnostic tests. The advent of massive parallel sequencing (ie, next generation sequencing) has afforded the characterization of this novel pathogen, informed the sequences best adapted for RT-PCR assays, guided vaccine production, and is currently used for tracking and monitoring SARS-CoV-2 variants.

Evaluation of immuview RSV antigen test (SSI siagnostica) and BinaxNOW RSV card (alere) for rapid detection of respiratory syncytial virus in retrospectively and prospectively collected respiratory samples

Human orthopneumovirus, formerly known as respiratory syncytial virus (RSV), is a frequent cause of hospitalization among infants due to respiratory tract infection. Fast, reliable, and easy to perform tests are needed to optimize treatment and to identify children that should be contact isolated to avoid nosocomial outbreaks. We prospectively tested 200 respiratory samples with a new assay (ImmuView RSV Antigen Test, SSI Diagnostica) and compared the results to the Alere BinaxNOW RSV Card by using our laboratory-developed real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (PCR) as reference. In addition, 300 retrospectively collected respiratory samples were included in the study. The sensitivities of both antigen kits were very low (<50%). Sensitivities were higher when samples came from children less than 6 years, when samples came from nasopharynx or lower respiratory airways, or when samples were positive for RSV serotype A compared to when samples came from adults, samples were throat swabs, or samples were positive for RSV serotype B. In conclusion, the ImmuView RSV antigen kit did not perform well and may at the most be used as a quick guidance for clinical decision. Thus, it cannot stand alone without reverse transcription PCR confirmation of negative results.

Point-of-care diagnostics for respiratory viral infections

Introduction: Successful treatment outcomes for viral respiratory tract infections presenting from primary health care to quaternary hospitals will only be achieved with rapid, sensitive and specific identification of pathogens to allow effective pathogen-specific antiviral therapy and infection control measures.

Areas covered: This review aims to explore the different point-of-care tests currently available to diagnose viral respiratory tract infections, discuss the advantages and limitations of point-of-care testing, and provide insights into the future of point-of-care tests. The following databases were searched: Medline (January 1996 to 30 September 2017) and Embase (1988 to 30 September 2017), using the following keywords: ‘point of care’, ‘respiratory virus’, ‘influenza’, ‘RSV’, ‘diagnostics’, ‘nucleic acid test’ and ‘PCR’.

Expert commentary: Viral respiratory tract infections cause significant morbidity and mortality worldwide, and point-of-care tests are facilitating the rapid identification of the pathogen responsible given the similarities in clinical presentation.

SOFIA®RSV: prospective laboratory evaluation and implementation of a rapid diagnostic test in a pediatric emergency ward

Background

Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) is responsible for severe respiratory infections and higher costs in medical care. The two aims of this work were to assess the performances of SOFIA^®RSV tests in “real-life-laboratory” conditions (study 1) and implemented at point-of-care testing in a pediatric emergency department (ED, study 2), during two consecutive winter seasons.

Methods

In study 1, fresh nasopharyngeal swabs from patients of all ages were sampled in 1.5 ml of Universal virological Transport Medium (UTM) and prospectively tested using SOFIA^®RSV tests. In study 2, conducted in a pediatric ED, nasopharyngeal swabs were placed in 3 ml of UTM. All SOFIA^®RSV tests were confirmed by molecular testing, considered as reference method. The epidemiological and clinical features of tested patients, as well as the care of these patients after obtaining quick results were evaluated.

Results

The sensitivities of SOFIA^®RSV in infants (aged under 24 months) performed in the laboratory and in the pediatric ED were respectively 95% (95% CI: 86.8–98.1) and 74.8% (95% CI: 68.0–80.9) compared to PCR. In study 1, the sensitivity among children (from 2 to 15 years old) and adults (above 15 years old) dropped to 45% (95% CI: 23.1–68.5) and 59% (95% CI: 32.9–81.6), respectively. In study 2, there were some differences in bed-management of SOFIA^®RSV positive compared to SOFIA^®RSV negative infants.

Conclusions

SOFIA^®RSV tests performed in the laboratory and in the pediatric ED show high and satisfactory sensitivities among young children under 24 months, which supports its robustness and reliability. However, the impact of these tests on patient care at point-of-care cannot be clearly assessed when considering the limits of the study 2 design.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12879-017-2557-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Diagnostic Accuracy of Rapid Antigen Detection Tests for Respiratory Syncytial Virus Infection: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) rapid antigen detection tests (RADT) are extensively used in clinical laboratories. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the accuracy of RADTs for diagnosis of RSV infection and to determine factors associated with accuracy estimates. We searched EMBASE and PubMed for diagnostic-accuracy studies of commercialized RSV RADTs. Studies reporting sensitivity and specificity data compared to a reference standard (reverse transcriptase PCR [RT-PCR], immunofluorescence, or viral culture) were considered. Two reviewers independently extracted data on study characteristics, diagnostic-accuracy estimates, and study quality. Accuracy estimates were pooled using bivariate random-effects regression models. Heterogeneity was investigated with prespecified subgroup analyses. Seventy-one articles met inclusion criteria. Overall, RSV RADT pooled sensitivity and specificity were 80% (95% confidence interval [CI], 76% to 83%) and 97% (95% CI, 96% to 98%), respectively. Positive- and negative-likelihood ratios were 25.5 (95% CI, 18.3 to 35.5) and 0.21 (95% CI, 0.18 to 0.24), respectively. Sensitivity was higher in children (81% [95% CI, 78%, 84%]) than in adults (29% [95% CI, 11% to 48%]). Because of this disparity, further subgroup analyses were restricted to pediatric data (63 studies). Test sensitivity was poorest using RT-PCR as a reference standard and highest using immunofluorescence (74% versus 88%; P < 0.001). Industry-sponsored studies reported significantly higher sensitivity (87% versus 78%; P = 0.01). Our results suggest that the poor sensitivity of RSV RADTs in adults may preclude their use in this population. Furthermore, industry-sponsored studies and those that did not use RT-PCR as a reference standard likely overestimated test sensitivity.

Multicenter evaluation of BD Veritor System and RSV K-SeT for rapid detection of respiratory syncytial virus in a diagnostic laboratory setting

The recently introduced BD Veritor System RSV laboratory kit (Becton Dickinson, Sparks, MD, USA) with automatic reading was evaluated and compared with the RSV K-SeT (Coris BioConcept, Gembloux, Belgium) for the detection of respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) using 248 nasopharyngeal aspirates of children younger than 6 years old with respiratory tract infection. Compared to reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction as gold standard, both tests had an identical sensitivity of 78.1% and a specificity of 96.8% and 95.8% for the BD Veritor System and RSV K-SeT, respectively. Both antigen tests can be used to reliably confirm RSV in young children. However, a negative result does not definitively exclude the presence of RSV.