Skip to main content

Web Content Display Web Content Display

Skip banner

Web Content Display Web Content Display

Logotyp Una Europa

Logotyp Uczelnia Badawcza Inicjatywa Doskonałości

 

Web Content Display Web Content Display

Web Content Display Web Content Display

Is the antigen reliable in detecting SARS-Co-V-2?

Is the antigen reliable in detecting SARS-Co-V-2?

One of the principal methods of fighting off the pandemic is testing society for coronavirus. Various methods are deployed to that end: molecular, antigen and immunological tests. Which is reliable? This question has been addressed in an article by a group of researchers from Cracow , published in Viruses (an open-access journal published by the Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute).

A test for SARS-CoV-2 infection plays an essential role in monitoring the spread of the COVID-19 pandemic. The “golden standard” of diagnostics is the molecular test, also known as the genetic test, drawing on the real-time polymerase chain reaction (qPCR). It enables researchers to detect even a trace number of RNA particles of the SARS-CoV-2 virus in the biological material under investigation, and to verify infection at a high rate of accuracy. Unfortunately, it costs money. A well equipped laboratory, competent personnel involved and the time-to-result all set the cost of testing one person at around PLN 400 to 500. Antigen tests seem faster, cheaper and readily available, but are they equally reliable? This problem has been addressed by the team led by professor Tomasz Gosiewski of the Department of Medicinal Molecular Biology, Chair in Microbiology, JUMC in collaboration with the Team of Cracow’s John Paul II Specialist Hospital  in Kraków.  In their article “Comparison of antigen tests and qPCR in rapid diagnostics of infections caused by SARS-CoV-2 virus” , published in the journal Viruses, they present the results of the research they have conducted.  The researchers sought to compare a selected antigen test (Humasis COVID-19 Ag Test) to the results obtained for the qPCR method (Vitassay qPCR SARS-CoV-2): 189 samples of nasopharynx swabs from patients with COVID-19-like symptoms. The results for the qPCR and the antigen test were as follows: 47 positive and 142 negative to 45 positive and 144 negative. The sensitivity of 91.5% and specificity of 98.6% calculated for the antigen test show discrepancies that are statistically negligible compare to qPCR. The study has shown that the effectiveness of the analysed antigen tests in fast laboratory diagnostics of SARS-CoV-2 infection is high enough for the tests to be an alternative and complementary to nucleic acid amplification tests (NAAT) at the stage of virus replication in the course of COVID-19, i.e. in the period of several days of the occurrence of infection symptoms.

 

“The study we have published falls within the current trend of developing the most effective methods of fighting off COVID-19. The first and crucial link is fast, efficient and cheap diagnostics of infections. More and more cheap diagnostic tests enter the market, but not all of them have been tested for their detection efficiency, which is a matter of immense importance, given how badly we need to control the spread of the virus. In our study, we also verified the right manner of material extraction in the form of a swab. To that end, we analysed the preparations using the BX63 microscope (Olympus), and checked whether the cells had been extracted from the nasopharynx, as recommended. Otherwise, the results we obtained would be less reliable (part of the results would have been falsely negative)”, said prof. dr hab. Tomasz Gosiewski of of the Department of the Medicinal Molecular Biology, JUMC.

 

To read the full version of the article, click here.

 

The automated fluorescence microscope BX63 (Olympus) used in the study has been purchased with the funds of the Strategic Programme Excellence Initiative at Jagiellonian University. 

 

[1] Adrianna Klajmon, Aldona Olechowska-Jarząb, Dominika Salamon, Agnieszka Sroka-Oleksiak, Monika Brzychczy-Włoch, Tomasz Gosiewski

 

The article on the qLIFE PRA website

Recommended
Mądra Książka Roku

Mądra Książka Roku

Rok funkcjonowania Centrum Badań Mózgu!

Rok funkcjonowania Centrum Badań Mózgu!

Ruszyły zapisy do konkursu Kreatywny Kampus!

Ruszyły zapisy do konkursu Kreatywny Kampus!

Trwają zapisy na Semestraton #SDG 2024 Challenge!

Trwają zapisy na Semestraton #SDG 2024 Challenge!