Quantifying the potential value of antigen-detection rapid diagnostic tests for COVID-19: a modelling analysis

Abstract Background Testing plays a critical role in treatment and prevention responses to the COVID-19 pandemic. Compared to nucleic acid tests (NATs), antigen-detection rapid diagnostic tests (Ag-RDTs) can be more accessible, but typically have lower sensitivity and specificity. By quantifying the...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Saskia Ricks, Emily A. Kendall, David W. Dowdy, Jilian A. Sacks, Samuel G. Schumacher, Nimalan Arinaminpathy
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: BMC 2021-03-01
Series:BMC Medicine
Subjects:
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-021-01948-z
id doaj-2eb6dc57206c4fb19a209ff79f7f859a
record_format Article
spelling doaj-2eb6dc57206c4fb19a209ff79f7f859a2021-03-11T12:07:33ZengBMCBMC Medicine1741-70152021-03-0119111310.1186/s12916-021-01948-zQuantifying the potential value of antigen-detection rapid diagnostic tests for COVID-19: a modelling analysisSaskia Ricks0Emily A. Kendall1David W. Dowdy2Jilian A. Sacks3Samuel G. Schumacher4Nimalan Arinaminpathy5MRC Centre for Global Infectious Disease Analysis, Imperial College LondonDivision of Infectious Diseases, Johns Hopkins University School of MedicineDepartment of Epidemiology, The Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public HealthFoundation for Innovative New DiagnosticsFoundation for Innovative New DiagnosticsMRC Centre for Global Infectious Disease Analysis, Imperial College LondonAbstract Background Testing plays a critical role in treatment and prevention responses to the COVID-19 pandemic. Compared to nucleic acid tests (NATs), antigen-detection rapid diagnostic tests (Ag-RDTs) can be more accessible, but typically have lower sensitivity and specificity. By quantifying these trade-offs, we aimed to inform decisions about when an Ag-RDT would offer greater public health value than reliance on NAT. Methods Following an expert consultation, we selected two use cases for analysis: rapid identification of people with COVID-19 amongst patients admitted with respiratory symptoms in a ‘hospital’ setting and early identification and isolation of people with mildly symptomatic COVID-19 in a ‘community’ setting. Using decision analysis, we evaluated the health system cost and health impact (deaths averted and infectious days isolated) of an Ag-RDT-led strategy, compared to a strategy based on NAT and clinical judgement. We adopted a broad range of values for ‘contextual’ parameters relevant to a range of settings, including the availability of NAT and the performance of clinical judgement. We performed a multivariate sensitivity analysis to all of these parameters. Results In a hospital setting, an Ag-RDT-led strategy would avert more deaths than a NAT-based strategy, and at lower cost per death averted, when the sensitivity of clinical judgement is less than 90%, and when NAT results are available in time to inform clinical decision-making for less than 85% of patients. The use of an Ag-RDT is robustly supported in community settings, where it would avert more transmission at lower cost than relying on NAT alone, under a wide range of assumptions. Conclusions Despite their imperfect sensitivity and specificity, Ag-RDTs have the potential to be simultaneously more impactful, and have a lower cost per death and infectious person-days averted, than current approaches to COVID-19 diagnostic testing.https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-021-01948-zAntigenRapid diagnostic testsCOVID-19
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Saskia Ricks
Emily A. Kendall
David W. Dowdy
Jilian A. Sacks
Samuel G. Schumacher
Nimalan Arinaminpathy
spellingShingle Saskia Ricks
Emily A. Kendall
David W. Dowdy
Jilian A. Sacks
Samuel G. Schumacher
Nimalan Arinaminpathy
Quantifying the potential value of antigen-detection rapid diagnostic tests for COVID-19: a modelling analysis
BMC Medicine
Antigen
Rapid diagnostic tests
COVID-19
author_facet Saskia Ricks
Emily A. Kendall
David W. Dowdy
Jilian A. Sacks
Samuel G. Schumacher
Nimalan Arinaminpathy
author_sort Saskia Ricks
title Quantifying the potential value of antigen-detection rapid diagnostic tests for COVID-19: a modelling analysis
title_short Quantifying the potential value of antigen-detection rapid diagnostic tests for COVID-19: a modelling analysis
title_full Quantifying the potential value of antigen-detection rapid diagnostic tests for COVID-19: a modelling analysis
title_fullStr Quantifying the potential value of antigen-detection rapid diagnostic tests for COVID-19: a modelling analysis
title_full_unstemmed Quantifying the potential value of antigen-detection rapid diagnostic tests for COVID-19: a modelling analysis
title_sort quantifying the potential value of antigen-detection rapid diagnostic tests for covid-19: a modelling analysis
publisher BMC
series BMC Medicine
issn 1741-7015
publishDate 2021-03-01
description Abstract Background Testing plays a critical role in treatment and prevention responses to the COVID-19 pandemic. Compared to nucleic acid tests (NATs), antigen-detection rapid diagnostic tests (Ag-RDTs) can be more accessible, but typically have lower sensitivity and specificity. By quantifying these trade-offs, we aimed to inform decisions about when an Ag-RDT would offer greater public health value than reliance on NAT. Methods Following an expert consultation, we selected two use cases for analysis: rapid identification of people with COVID-19 amongst patients admitted with respiratory symptoms in a ‘hospital’ setting and early identification and isolation of people with mildly symptomatic COVID-19 in a ‘community’ setting. Using decision analysis, we evaluated the health system cost and health impact (deaths averted and infectious days isolated) of an Ag-RDT-led strategy, compared to a strategy based on NAT and clinical judgement. We adopted a broad range of values for ‘contextual’ parameters relevant to a range of settings, including the availability of NAT and the performance of clinical judgement. We performed a multivariate sensitivity analysis to all of these parameters. Results In a hospital setting, an Ag-RDT-led strategy would avert more deaths than a NAT-based strategy, and at lower cost per death averted, when the sensitivity of clinical judgement is less than 90%, and when NAT results are available in time to inform clinical decision-making for less than 85% of patients. The use of an Ag-RDT is robustly supported in community settings, where it would avert more transmission at lower cost than relying on NAT alone, under a wide range of assumptions. Conclusions Despite their imperfect sensitivity and specificity, Ag-RDTs have the potential to be simultaneously more impactful, and have a lower cost per death and infectious person-days averted, than current approaches to COVID-19 diagnostic testing.
topic Antigen
Rapid diagnostic tests
COVID-19
url https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-021-01948-z
work_keys_str_mv AT saskiaricks quantifyingthepotentialvalueofantigendetectionrapiddiagnostictestsforcovid19amodellinganalysis
AT emilyakendall quantifyingthepotentialvalueofantigendetectionrapiddiagnostictestsforcovid19amodellinganalysis
AT davidwdowdy quantifyingthepotentialvalueofantigendetectionrapiddiagnostictestsforcovid19amodellinganalysis
AT jilianasacks quantifyingthepotentialvalueofantigendetectionrapiddiagnostictestsforcovid19amodellinganalysis
AT samuelgschumacher quantifyingthepotentialvalueofantigendetectionrapiddiagnostictestsforcovid19amodellinganalysis
AT nimalanarinaminpathy quantifyingthepotentialvalueofantigendetectionrapiddiagnostictestsforcovid19amodellinganalysis
_version_ 1724224809107193856