Diagnostic accuracy of the FebriDx host response point-of-care test in patients hospitalised with suspected COVID-19

Abstract Introduction Management of the COVID-19 pandemic is hampered by long delays associated with centralised laboratory PCR testing. In hospitals this leads to poor patient flow and nosocomial transmission and so rapid, accurate diagnostic tests are urgently required. The FebriDx is a point-of-care test that detects an antiviral host response protein in finger prick blood within 10 minutes, but its accuracy for the identification of COVID-19 is unknown. Methods We performed a real-world diagnostic accuracy study of FebriDx in hospitalised patients during the first wave of the pandemic. Measures of diagnostic accuracy were calculated based on FebriDx results compared to the reference standard of SARS-CoV-2 PCR on combined nose and throat swabs. A multivariable predictive model including FebriDx, age, sex, and clinical characteristics was developed and underwent internal validation. Results FebriDx was performed on 251 patients and gave a valid result in 248. 118 of 248 (48%) were PCR positive for COVID-19. FebriDx results were available after 10 minutes compared with 1.7 (1.6 to 2.1) hours with point-of-care PCR testing and 23.4 (17.2 to 31.1) hours with laboratory PCR testing. Sensitivity of FebriDx for the identification of COVID-19 was 93% (110/118; 95% CI 87 to 97%) and specificity was 86% (112/130; 95%CI 79 to 92%). Positive and negative likelihood ratios were 6.73 (95%CI 4.37 to 10.37) and 0.08 (95%CI 0.04 to 0.15) respectively. In the multivariate model age, sex and other clinical features did not contribute significantly to the effect of the FebriDx result in distinguishing patients with and without COVID-19. Conclusions During the first wave of the pandemic, FebriDx had high accuracy for the identification of COVID-19 in hospitalised adults and could be deployed as a front door triage tool. Trial registration ISRCTN14966673

[1]  Victor M Corman,et al.  Detection of 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) by real-time RT-PCR , 2020, Euro surveillance : bulletin Europeen sur les maladies transmissibles = European communicable disease bulletin.

[2]  M. Shirley FebriDx®: A Rapid Diagnostic Test for Differentiating Bacterial and Viral Aetiologies in Acute Respiratory Infections , 2019, Molecular Diagnosis & Therapy.

[3]  Zhibo Wen,et al.  Diagnostic performance between CT and initial real-time RT-PCR for clinically suspected 2019 coronavirus disease (COVID-19) patients outside Wuhan, China , 2020, Respiratory Medicine.

[4]  H. Kanegane,et al.  MxA-Based Recognition of Viral Illness in Febrile Children by a Whole Blood Assay , 2006, Pediatric Research.

[5]  W. Self,et al.  Diagnostic Accuracy of FebriDx: A Rapid Test to Detect Immune Responses to Viral and Bacterial Upper Respiratory Infections , 2017, Journal of clinical medicine.

[6]  R. Newcombe Two-sided confidence intervals for the single proportion: comparison of seven methods. , 1998, Statistics in medicine.

[7]  S. Julious Two‐sided confidence intervals for the single proportion: comparison of seven methods by Robert G. Newcombe, Statistics in Medicine 1998; 17:857–872 , 2005, Statistics in medicine.

[8]  Q. Tao,et al.  Correlation of Chest CT and RT-PCR Testing in Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) in China: A Report of 1014 Cases , 2020, Radiology.

[9]  G. Heinze,et al.  Prediction models for diagnosis and prognosis of covid-19: systematic review and critical appraisal , 2020, BMJ.

[10]  F. Harrell,et al.  Regression modelling strategies for improved prognostic prediction. , 1984, Statistics in medicine.

[11]  J. Lisby,et al.  Multicenter evaluation of the QIAstat Respiratory Panel—A new rapid highly multiplexed PCR based assay for diagnosis of acute respiratory tract infections , 2020, PloS one.

[12]  Richard D Riley,et al.  Minimum sample size for developing a multivariable prediction model: PART II ‐ binary and time‐to‐event outcomes , 2018, Statistics in medicine.

[13]  D. Hober,et al.  Diagnosis of Viral Infections Using Myxovirus Resistance Protein A (MxA) , 2015, Pediatrics.

[14]  L. Kucirka,et al.  Variation in False-Negative Rate of Reverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction–Based SARS-CoV-2 Tests by Time Since Exposure , 2020, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[15]  Richard D Riley,et al.  Prediction models for diagnosis and prognosis of covid-19 infection: systematic review and critical appraisal , 2020 .

[16]  Multicenter Evaluation of the QIAstat-Dx Respiratory Panel for Detection of Viruses and Bacteria in Nasopharyngeal Swab Specimens , 2020, Journal of Clinical Microbiology.