4.6 Article

Clinical Application of a New SARS-CoV-2 Antigen Detection Kit (Colloidal Gold) in the Detection of COVID-19

Journal

DIAGNOSTICS
Volume 11, Issue 6, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/diagnostics11060995

Keywords

SARS-CoV-2; COVID-19; antigen test; nucleocapsid; clinical validation; nasal swab; nasopharyngeal swab

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The COVID-19 Antigen Detection Kit (Colloidal Gold-CG) showed high sensitivity and specificity when the PCR Ct value was less than 33, making it suitable for early disease screening. Confirmatory PCR is essential in cases where a false negative result is suspected.
The precise diagnosis of COVID-19 is of outmost importance in order to effectively treat patients and prevent SARS-CoV-2 transmission. Herein, we evaluated the sensitivity and specificity of the COVID-19 Antigen Detection Kit (Colloidal Gold-CG) compared with PCR in nasopharyngeal and nasal samples. A total of 114 positive and 244 negative nasopharyngeal specimens confirmed by PCR were used in this comparative study. When the PCR positive Cycle Threshold (Ct) value was <= 25, CG sensitivity was 100%. When the PCR positive Ct value was <= 33, CG sensitivity was 99%. When the PCR positive Ct value was <= 40, CG sensitivity was 89.47%. Regarding nasal swabs, a total of 109 positive and 250 negative specimens confirmed by PCR were used. When the PCR positive Ct value was <= 25, CG sensitivity was 100%. When the PCR positive Ct value was <= 33, CG sensitivity was 96.12%. When the PCR positive Ct value was <= 37, CG sensitivity was 91.74%. Specificity was above 99% regardless of the Ct value of PCR positivity for both nasopharyngeal and nasal specimens. Overall, the CG showed high sensitivity and specificity when the PCR Ct value was less than 33. Therefore, CG can be used for screening early in the disease course. Confirmatory PCR is essential when a false negative result is suspected.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available