Performance evaluation of antigen test (iFlash-2019-nCoV
Antigen®) for detection of SARS-CoV-2 virus in serum samples
Melek MANAI BOUOKAZI¹, Lina MOUNA¹, Coralie KERESTEDJIAN-PALLIER¹,
Anne-Marie ROQUE-AFONSO¹, and Christelle VAULOUP FELLOUS¹
¹ Université Paris-Saclay, Inserm 1193, AP-HP, Service de Virologie,
Hôpital Paul-Brousse, Villejuif, France
Abstract: Molecular assays from nasopharyngeal swabs are the current
reference method to diagnose COVID-19. As an alternative, we evaluated
the performance of the iFlash-2019-nCoV Antigen® (YHLO, Shenzhen,
China), developed for SARS-CoV-2 N-antigen detection in serum samples.
Specificity, determined on 50 pre-pandemic samples, was 100%. Overall
sensitivity, evaluated on 40 sera from patients with RT-PCR confirmed
infection, was 67.5%. However, sensitivity reached 73% in symptomatic
patients, 80% in patients with high and medium nasopharyngeal (NP)
viral loads (samples with Ct≤33) and, 90% in samples collected within
the first week after symptoms onset. These sera were further analyzed
with the COV-QUANTO® ELISA and COVID-VIRO® LFIA assays (AAZ,
Boulogne-Billancourt, France). EIA Ag assays from Yhlo and AAZ had
comparable performances, and both were more sensitive than the LFIA.
These findings suggest that SARS-CoV-2 N-antigen detection in serum
could be an alternative to PCR from NP swabs, at least early after onset
of symptoms. Further studies are required to confirm these results.
Keywords: SARS-CoV-2, antigen, serum, COVID-19, diagnostic
Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus type 2 (SARS-CoV-2)
infection has caused a global pandemic since early 2019 and has become a
major public health concern all over the world (1, 2). Therefore a
specific, sensitive, and rapid SARS-CoV-2 diagnostic method is crucial
for reducing the disease spread. Nucleic Acid testing, primarily by
real-time reverse-transcription Polymerase Chain Reaction (RT-PCR), from
nasopharyngeal (NP) swabs remain the cornerstone of COVID-19 diagnostic
(3). However, RT-PCR tests require experienced laboratories, are
expensive and may have relatively long turnaround times (4, 5). False
negative rates of SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR assays up to 30% have been reported
and Covid-19 diagnosis in these symptomatic patients is then inferred
mostly by typical findings at chest computed tomography (6). Hence,
alternative complementary assays such as antigen detection tests could
contribute in improving SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis.
In this study, we aimed to evaluate the performance of the
iFlash-2019-nCoV Antigen® (YHLO, Shenzhen, China), (YHLO Ag), a
Chemiluminescent immunoassay, run on the iFlash 1800 analyzer (YHLO,
Shenzhen, China) for SARS-CoV-2 N-antigen in serum samples .
Specificity was assessed on 50 pre-pandemic serum samples collected in
2019.
Sensitivity was evaluated on 40 serum samples collected on the same day
as the NP sample in patients with a positive RT-PCR in NP sample (range
of Ct values: 11-41 with Alinity m SARS-COV-2 assay, Abbott Molecular).
Of these, 3 were collected in asymptomatic patients (range Ct values
39-41) and 37 in symptomatic patients (range Ct values 11-40).
All pre-pandemic samples were negative with the YHLO antigen test, the
specificity was therefore 100%. Compared to NP RT-PCR, the overall
sensitivity of YHLO Ag was 67.5% (27/40). The YHLO Ag assay was able to
detect N antigen in the serum of patients with high (Ct<23),
medium (23≤Ct<33) and low (33≤Ct) NP viral loads with a 85.7%
(6/7), 75% (6/8) and 14.3% (1/7) sensitivity, respectively. Antigenic
result was negative in all asymptomatic patients (0/3), and positive in
73% (27/37) of the symptomatic ones. In addition, N antigen detection
rate by time after onset of symptoms was 90% (18/20) on samples
collected before day 7; 66,7% (6/9) on samples collected between day 7
and 14; and 33,3% (2/6) on sera collected after 14 days (table 1). This
low antigen sensitivity beyond 14 days has been linked to anti-N IgG
seroconversion (5). Indeed, antigen detection rate was 92.9% (13/14) in
samples without detectable total anti-N antibodies (Elecsys®
Anti-SARS-CoV-2 immunoassay, Roche), and only 44.4% (8/18) in patients
with detectable antibodies (p=0.004) (Table 2). In addition, samples
with positive N-antigenemia exhibited lower anti-N antibody index: mean
+/- SD indexes were 4.39 +/- 7.43 and 35.52 +/- 39.50 for samples with
positive and negative antigenemia, respectively (p = 0.001).
Serum samples from Covid-19 patients were further analyzed with the
microplate ELISA COV-QUANTO immunoassay ® (AAZ, Boulogne-Billancourt,
France) (AAZ ELISA) and the Lateral Flow Immunoassay (LFIA) COVID-VIRO ®
(AAZ, Boulogne-Billancourt, France) (AAZ RDT). Concordance was 92.3%
(36/39 samples) between YHLO Ag and AAZ ELISA, and 92% (23/25 samples)
between YHLO Ag AAZ RDT (Table 3). YHLO Ag assay’s performances were
comparable to AAZ ELISA test, and both EIA assays were more sensitive
than the LFIA.
In summary, the iFlash-2019-nCoV Antigen® (YHLO) had an excellent
specificity (100%) and an overall sensitivity of 67.5%, compared to NP
RT-PCR. However, sensitivity was 73% in symptomatic patients; 80% in
patients with high and medium NP viral loads (12/15 samples with Ct≤33),
a surrogate marker of infectivity (7), and reached 90% in samples
collected within 7 days after onset of symptoms. We acknowledge that the
number of samples is small and that further studies are needed to
confirm our results. Nevertheless, SARS-CoV-2 antigenemia is already
emerging as a useful as a complementary test to improve COVID-19
diagnosis, especially in patients with a high clinical suspicion or
typical imaging findings for COVID-19 and several PCR-negative NP
samples. Additionally, SARS-CoV-2 antigenemia could be an alternative to
NP swabs in patients that refuse or have contra-indication of this type
of sampling (8).
In conclusion, SARS-CoV-2 antigenemia could be offered as a
complementary diagnostic tool for Covid-19. Additional studies are
needed to determine its position in the diagnostic arsenal.
References:
1. LI, Xue, ZHANG, Liying, CHEN, Si, et al. Recent progress on the
mutations of SARS-CoV-2 spike protein and suggestions for prevention and
controlling of the pandemic. Infection, Genetics and Evolution, 2021, p.
104971.
2. LAMBERT-NICLOT, Sidonie, CUFFEL, Alexis, LE PAPE, Samuel, et al.
Evaluation of a rapid diagnostic assay for detection of SARS-CoV-2
antigen in nasopharyngeal swabs. Journal of clinical microbiology, 2020,
vol. 58, no 8, p. e00977-20.
3. FERTÉ, Thomas, RAMEL, Viviane, CAZANAVE, Charles, et al. Accuracy of
COVID-19 rapid antigenic tests compared to RT-PCR in a student
population: the StudyCov study. Journal of Clinical Virology, 2021, p.
104878.
4. BRIHN, Auguste, CHANG, Jamie, OYONG, Kelsey, et al. Diagnostic
Performance of an Antigen Test with RT-PCR for the Detection of
SARS-CoV-2 in a Hospital Setting—Los Angeles County, California,
June–August 2020. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 2021, vol. 70,
no 19, p. 702.
5. LE HINGRAT, Quentin, VISSEAUX, Benoit, LAOUENAN, Cedric, et al.
SARS-CoV-2 N-antigenemia: A new alternative to nucleic acid
amplification techniques. medRxiv, 2020.
6. CARAMELLO, Valeria, MACCIOTTA, Alessandra, DE SALVE, Alessandro
Vincenzo, et al. False negative RT-PCR tests in COVID-19 patients: an
epidemiological analysis of 302 patients. Public Health, 2021.
7. LA SCOLA, Bernard, LE BIDEAU, Marion, ANDREANI, Julien, et al. Viral
RNA load as determined by cell culture as a management tool for
discharge of SARS-CoV-2 patients from infectious disease wards. European
Journal of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases, 2020, vol. 39,
no 6, p. 1059-1061.
8. WISEMAN, Jessica, D’AMICO, Timothy A., ZAWADZKA, Sabina, et al. False
negative SARS-CoV-2 PCR-A case report and literature review. Respiratory
medicine case reports, 2020, vol. 31, p. 101140.
Table 1: Sensitivity of the iFlash-2019-nCoV Antigen® according
to NP viral load, serum sampling from symptoms’ onset and presence of
symptoms.