Jasmina Obradovic, Vladimir Jurisic

Pages: 58–61

DOI: 10.37392/RapProc.2022.14

Quick identification of coronavirus was an emergency in the COVID-19 pandemic. The most used diagnostic tools were serologic, rapid antigen tests, as fast, easily applicable, and affordable, but with lower sensitivity. The results were usually confirmed with a reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction. This assay requires proper expertise and robust laboratory equipment. It is further, costly and time-consuming, with restricted application in low-income countries. Even so, it is used as a golden standard, since it has high specificity and sensitivity. The serologic antibody-based assays were also applied during this Covid-19 burden. Their application was able two weeks after the Covid-19 onset since that was the period when antibodies might be detected. Here are briefly presented the advantages and disadvantages of these assays. Meanwhile, the majority of the diagnostic tests were developed, with some of them being automated and highly sensitive, but often costly. The general recommendation is the improvement of the sensitivity of the serologic tests and development of the easily applicable, fast, and accurate diagnostic tests.
  1. E. Mahase, “China coronavirus: WHO declares international emergency as death toll exceeds 200,” BMJ, vol. 368, m408, Jan. 2020.
    DOI: 10.1136/bmj.m408
    PMid: 32005727
  2. M. J. Mina, K. G. Andersen, “COVID-19 testing: One size does not fit all,” Science, vol. 371, no. 6525, pp. 126 – 127, Jan. 2021.
    DOI: 10.1126/science.abe9187
    PMid: 33414210
  3. V. Thakur, R. K. Ratho, “OMICRON (B.1.1.529): A new SARS-CoV-2 variant of concern mounting worldwide fear,” J. Med. Virol., vol. 94, no. 5, pp. 1821 – 1824, May 2022.
    DOI: 10.1002/jmv.27541
    PMid: 34936120
  4. S. K. Saxena et al., “Characterization of the novel SARS-CoV-2 Omicron (B.1.1.529) variant of concern and its global perspective,” J. Med. Virol., vol. 94, no. 4, pp. 1738 – 1744, Apr. 2022.
    DOI: 10.1002/jmv.27524
    PMid: 34905235
  5. A. La Marca et al., “Testing for SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19): a systematic review and clinical guide to molecular and serological in-vitro diagnostic assays,” Reprod. Biomed. Online, vol. 41, no. 3, pp. 483 – 499, Sep. 2020.
    DOI: 10.1016/j.rbmo.2020.06.001
    PMid: 32651106
    PMCid: PMC7293848
  6. M. N. Zahan et al., “Diagnosis of COVID-19 in symptomatic patients: An updated review,” Vacunas, vol. 23, no. 1, pp. 55 – 61, Jan. – Apr. 2022.
    DOI: 10.1016/j.vacun.2021.06.002
    PMid: 34276268
    PMCid: PMC8275488
  7. S. S. Khandker, N. H. H. Nik Hashim, Z. Z. Deris, R. H. Shueb, M. A. Islam, “Diagnostic Accuracy of Rapid Antigen Test Kits for Detecting SARS-CoV-2: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of 17,171 Suspected COVID-19 Patients,” J. Clin. Med., vol. 10, no. 16, 3493, Aug. 2021.
    DOI: 10.3390/jcm10163493
    PMid: 34441789
    PMCid: PMC8397079
  8. J. Hayer, D. Kasapic, C. Zemmrich, “Real-world clinical performance of commercial SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen tests in suspected COVID-19: A systematic meta-analysis of available data as of November 20, 2020,” Int. J. Infect. Dis., vol. 108, pp. 592 – 602, Jul. 2021.
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ijid.2021.05.029
    PMid: 34015523
    PMCid: PMC8127520
  9. M. Arshadi et al., “Diagnostic Accuracy of Rapid Antigen Tests for COVID-19 Detection: A Systematic Review With Meta-analysis,” Front. Med., vol. 9, 870738, Apr. 2022.
    DOI: 10.3389/fmed.2022.870738
    PMid: 35463027
    PMCid: PMC9021531
  10. M. C. Smithgall, M. Dowlatshahi, S. L. Spitalnik, E. A. Hod, A. J. Rai, “Types of Assays for SARS-CoV-2 Testing: A Review,” Lab. Med., vol. 51, no. 5, pp. e59 – e65, Sep. 2020.
    DOI: 10.1093/labmed/lmaa039
    PMid: 32657343
    PMCid: PMC7454768
  11. F. Fenollar et al., “Evaluation of the Panbio COVID-19 Rapid Antigen Detection Test Device for the Screening of Patients with COVID-19,” J. Clin. Microbiol., vol. 59, no. 2, Jan. 2021.
    DOI: 10.1128/jcm.02589-20
    PMid: 33139420
    PMCid: PMC8111145
  12. M. L. Bastos et al., “Diagnostic accuracy of serological tests for covid-19: systematic review and meta-analysis,” BMJ, vol. 370, m2516, Jul. 2020.
    DOI: 10.1136/bmj.m2516
    PMid: 32611558
    PMCid: PMC7327913
  13. J. Obradovic et al., “Optimization of PCR conditions for amplification of GC-Rich EGFR promoter sequence,” J. Clin. Lab. Anal., vol. 27, no. 6, pp. 487 – 493, Nov. 2013.
    DOI: 10.1002/jcla.21632
    PMid: 24218132
    PMCid: PMC6807403
  14. J. Obradovic, V. Jurisic, J. Todosijevic, “Application of the conventional and novel methods in testing EGFR variants for NSCLC patients in the last 10 years through different regions: a systematic review,” Mol. Biol. Rep., vol. 48, no. 4, pp. 3593 – 3604, Apr. 2021.
    DOI: 10.1007/s11033-021-06379-w
    PMid: 33973139
  15. A. Afzal, “Molecular diagnostic technologies for COVID-19: Limitations and challenges,” J. Adv. Res., vol. 26, pp. 149 – 159, Nov. 2020.
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jare.2020.08.002
    PMid: 32837738
    PMCid: PMC7406419
  16. R. Weissleder, H. Lee, J. Ko, M. J. Pittet, “COVID-19 diagnostics in context,” Sci. Transl. Med., vol. 12, no. 546, eabc1931, Jun. 2020.
    DOI: 10.1126/scitranslmed.abc1931
    PMid: 32493791
  17. I. M. Artika, A. Wiyatno, C. N. Ma’roef, “Pathogenic viruses: Molecular detection and characterization,” Infect. Genet. Evol., vol. 81, 104215, Jul. 2020.
    DOI: 10.1016/j.meegid.2020.104215
    PMid: 32006706
    PMCid: PMC7106233
  18. A. R. Craney et al., “Comparison of Two High-Throughput Reverse Transcription-PCR Systems for the Detection of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2,” J. Clin. Microbiol., vol. 58, no. 8, Jul. 2020.
    DOI: 10.1128/jcm.00890-20
    PMid: 32381643
    PMCid: PMC7383551
  19. E. Degli-Angeli et al., “Validation and verification of the Abbott RealTime SARS-CoV-2 assay analytical and clinical performance,” J. Clin. Virol., vol. 129, 104474, Aug. 2020.
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jcv.2020.104474
    PMid: 32504946
    PMCid: PMC7395853
  20. G. D. Braunstein, L. Schwartz, P. Hymel, J. Fielding, “False Positive Results With SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR Tests and How to Evaluate a RT-PCR-Positive Test for the Possibility of a False Positive Result,” J. Occup. Environ. Med., vol. 63, no. 3, pp. e159 – e162, Mar. 2021.
    DOI: 10.1097/jom.0000000000002138
    PMid: 33405498
    PMCid: PMC7934325
  21. L. M. Kucirka, S. A. Lauer, O. Laeyendecker, D. Boon, J. Lessler, “Variation in False-Negative Rate of Reverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction-Based SARS-CoV-2 Tests by Time Since Exposure,” Ann. Intern. Med., vol. 173, no. 4, pp. 262 – 267, Aug. 2020.
    DOI: 10.7326/m20-1495
    PMid: 32422057
    PMCid: PMC7240870
  22. H. Ritchie et al., Coronavirus Pandemic (Covid-19), Our World in Data, Oxford, UK, 2020.
    Retrieved from:
    Retrieved on: Sep. 13, 2021