Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34518817›Full record

ArticleBiosafety and health2021

The impact of sample processing on the rapid antigen detection test for SARS-CoV-2: Virus inactivation, VTM selection, and sample preservation.

Haiwei Zhou, Conghui Wang, Jian Rao, Lan Chen, Tingting Ma, Donglai Liu, Lili Ren, Sihong Xu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Biosafety and health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Evaluation of diagnostic performance of SARS-CoV-2 detection kits: a comparative study.Beni-Suef University journal of basic and applied sciences · 2023
    Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Haiwei ZhouDivision II of In Vitro Diagnostics for Infectious Diseases, Institute for In Vitro Diagnostics Control, National Institutes for Food and Drug Control, Beijing 100050, China.
Conghui WangNational Health Commission of the People's Republic of China Key Laboratory of Systems Biology of Pathogens and Christophe Mérieux Laboratory, Institute of Pathogen Biology, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100730, China.
Jian RaoNational Health Commission of the People's Republic of China Key Laboratory of Systems Biology of Pathogens and Christophe Mérieux Laboratory, Institute of Pathogen Biology, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100730, China.
Lan ChenNational Health Commission of the People's Republic of China Key Laboratory of Systems Biology of Pathogens and Christophe Mérieux Laboratory, Institute of Pathogen Biology, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100730, China.
Tingting MaDivision II of In Vitro Diagnostics for Infectious Diseases, Institute for In Vitro Diagnostics Control, National Institutes for Food and Drug Control, Beijing 100050, China.
Donglai LiuDivision II of In Vitro Diagnostics for Infectious Diseases, Institute for In Vitro Diagnostics Control, National Institutes for Food and Drug Control, Beijing 100050, China.
Lili RenNational Health Commission of the People's Republic of China Key Laboratory of Systems Biology of Pathogens and Christophe Mérieux Laboratory, Institute of Pathogen Biology, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100730, China.
Sihong XuDivision II of In Vitro Diagnostics for Infectious Diseases, Institute for In Vitro Diagnostics Control, National Institutes for Food and Drug Control, Beijing 100050, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Many factors have been identified as having the ability to affect the sensitivity of rapid antigen detection (RAD) tests for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). This study aimed to identify the impact of sample processing on the sensitivity of the RAD tests. We explored the effect of different inactivation methods, viral transport media (VTM) solutions, and sample preservation on the sensitivity of four RAD kits based on two SARS-CoV-2 strains. Compared with non-inactivation, heat inactivation significantly impacted the sensitivity of most RAD kits; however, β-propiolactone inactivation only had a minor effect. Some of the VTM solutions (VTM2, MANTACC) had a significant influence on the sensitivity of the RAD kits, especially for low viral-loads samples. The detection value of RAD kits was slightly decreased, while most of them were still in the detection range with the extension of preservation time and the increase of freeze-thaw cycles. Our results showed that selecting the appropriate inactivation methods and VTM solutions is necessary during reagent development, performance evaluation, and clinical application.

Indexed as

Rapid antigen detectionSample processSARS-CoV-2Sensitivity

Identifiers

PMID34518817
PMCPMC8426133

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.