# Performance of two rapid antigen tests against SARS-CoV-2 in neighborhoods of socioeconomic vulnerability from a middle-income country

**Authors:** Diana Zeballos, Laio Magno, Thais Aranha Rossi, Fabiane Soares, Jony Arrais Pinto Junior, Orlando Ferreira, Carina Carvalho dos Santos, Joice Neves Reis, Thiago S. Torres, Valdilea G. Veloso, Inês Dourado

PMC · DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0298579 · 2024-06-21

## TL;DR

This study evaluated two rapid antigen tests for SARS-CoV-2 in vulnerable neighborhoods in Brazil, finding they had high specificity but lower sensitivity than claimed, especially for people with high viral loads.

## Contribution

The study provides real-world diagnostic performance data of two Ag-RDTs in a middle-income country's vulnerable population.

## Key findings

- Both tests had 100% specificity but lower sensitivity (around 53%) compared to manufacturer claims.
- Sensitivity improved to over 80% for individuals with CT values <24, indicating higher viral load.
- Negative results require clinical and epidemiological context due to lower NPVs.

## Abstract

As new and improved antigen-detecting rapid diagnostic tests for SARS-CoV-2 infection (Ag-RDT) continue to be developed, assessing their diagnostic performance is necessary to increase test options with accurate and rapid diagnostic capacity especially in resource-constrained settings. This study aimed to assess the performance of two Ag-RDTs in a population-based study.

We conducted a diagnostic accuracy study in neighborhoods with high socioeconomic vulnerability in Salvador-Brazil, including individuals aged ≥12 years old who attended primary health services, between July and December 2022, with COVID-19 symptoms or who had been in contact with a confirmed case. Two Ag-RDTs were compared in parallel using reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) as reference standard, the PanbioTM COVID-19 Ag test (Abbott®) and Immuno-Rapid COVID-19 Ag (WAMA Diagnostic®). Sensitivity, specificity, positive (PPV) and negative predictive values (NPV) were calculated.

For the Abbott test the sensitivity was 52.7% (95% CI: 44.3% - 61.0%), specificity 100% (95% CI: 98.7% - 100%), PPV 100% (95% CI: 95.4% - 100%) and NPV 80.4% (95% CI: 75.9% - 84.4%). For the WAMA test, the sensitivity was 53.4% (95% CI: 45.0% - 61.6%), specificity 100% (95% CI: 98.7% - 100%), PPV 100% (95% CI: 95.4% - 100%) and NPV 80.7% (95% CI: 76.2% - 84.6%). Sensitivity for the group with Cycle Threshold (CT) <24 was 82.3% (95%CI: 72.1–90.0, n = 83) for PanbioTM COVID-19 Ag test and 87.3% (95%CI: 77.9–93.8, n = 83) for Immuno-Rapid COVID-19 Ag test.

Sensitivity for both Ag-RDT was lower than reported by manufacturers. In the stratified analysis, sensitivity was higher among those with lower CT values <24. Specificity was high for both rapid antigen tests. Both Ag-RDT showed to be useful for rapid diagnostic of potential cases of COVID-19. Negative results must be assessed carefully according to clinical and epidemiological information.

## Linked entities

- **Diseases:** SARS-CoV-2 (MONDO:0100096), COVID-19 (MONDO:0100096)

## Full-text entities

- **Diseases:** COVID-19 (MESH:D000086382)
- **Chemicals:** PanbioTM (-)
- **Species:** Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (no rank) [taxon 2697049]

## Figures

5 figures with captions in the complete paper: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC11192360/full.md

---
Source: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC11192360