Abstract:Background The pandemic of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has become the first concern in international affairs as the novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) is spreading all over the world at a terrific speed. The accuracy of early diagnosis is critical in the control of the spread of the virus. Although the real-time RT-PCR detection of the virus nucleic acid is the current golden diagnostic standard, it has high false negative rate when only apply single test. Objective Summarize the baseline characteristics and laboratory examination results of hospitalized COVID-19 patients. Analyze the factors that could interfere with the early diagnosis quantitatively to support the timely confirmation of the disease. Methods All suspected patients with COVID-19 were included in our study until Feb 9th, 2020. The last day of follow-up was Mar 20th, 2020. Throat swab real-time RT-PCR test was used to confirm SARS-CoV-2 infection. The difference between the epidemiological profile and first laboratory examination results of COVID-19 patients and non-COVID-19 patients were compared and analyzed by multiple logistic regression. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve and area under curve (AUC) were used to assess the potential diagnostic value in factors, which had statistical differences in regression analysis. Results In total, 315 hospitalized patients were included. Among them, 108 were confirmed as COVID-19 patients and 207 were non-COVID-19 patients. Two groups of patients have significance in comparing age, contact history, leukocyte count, lymphocyte count, C-reactive protein, erythrocyte sedimentation rate (p<0.10). Multiple logistic regression analysis showed age, contact history and decreasing lymphocyte count could be used as individual factor that has diagnostic value (p<0.05). The AUC of first RT-PCR test was 0.84 (95% CI 0.73-0.89), AUC of cumulative two times of RT-PCR tests was 0.92 (95% CI 0.88-0.96) and 0.96 (95% CI 0.93-0.99) for cumulative three times of RT-PCR tests. Ninety-six patients showed typical pneumonia radiological features in first CT scan, AUC was 0.74 (95% CI 0.60-0.73). The AUC of patients age, contact history with confirmed people and the decreased lymphocytes were 0.66 (95% CI 0.60-0.73), 0.67 (95% CI 0.61-0.73), 0.62 (95% CI 0.56-0.69), respectively. Taking chest CT scan diagnosis together with patients age and decreasing lymphocytes, AUC would be 0.86 (95% CI 0.82-0.90). The age threshold to predict COVID-19 was 41.5 years, with a diagnostic sensitivity of 0.70 (95% CI 0.61-0.79) and a specificity of 0.59 (95% CI 0.52-0.66). Positive and negative likelihood ratios were 1.71 and 0.50, respectively. Threshold of lymphocyte count to diagnose COVID-19 was 1.53x109/L, with a diagnostic sensitivity of 0.82 (95% CI 0.73-0.88) and a specificity of 0.50 (95% CI 0.43-0.57). Positive and negative likelihood ratios were 1.64 and 0.37, respectively. Conclusion Single RT-PCR test has relatively high false negative rate. When first RT-PCR test show negative result in suspected patients, the chest CT scan, contact history, age and lymphocyte count should be used combinedly to assess the possibility of SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Comparison of four commercial SARS-CoV-2 IgG immuno-assays in RT-PCR negative patients with suspect CT findings

Diagnostic performance of four SARS-CoV-2 antibody assays in patients with COVID-19 or with bacterial and non-SARS-CoV-2 viral respiratory infections

Epidemiological, Clinical, Laboratorial and CT Imaging Features of Hospitalized Patients with Initially Negative Detection of SARS-CoV-2 in China

The dangers of xenotransplantation

Assessment of SARS-CoV-2 serological tests for the diagnosis of COVID-19 through the evaluation of three immunoassays: Two automated immunoassays (Euroimmun and Abbott) and one rapid lateral flow immunoassay (NG Biotech)

Analysis of factors associated early diagnosis in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)

Comparison of Serologic Response of Hospitalized COVID-19 Patients Using 8 Immunoassays

Evaluation of four commercial, fully automated SARS-CoV-2 antibody tests suggests a revision of the Siemens SARS-CoV-2 IgG assay

The Clinical and Radiological Manifestations in Coronavirus Disease 2019 with Negative Nucleic Acid Results.

Multicentric evaluation of sensitivity of eight commercial anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody assays and their correlation to virus neutralization titers in seropositive subjects

Recent Advances in the Evaluation of Serological Assays for the Diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 Infection and COVID-19

Validation of the Analytical Performance of Nine Commercial RT-qPCR Kits for SARS-CoV-2 Detection Using Certified Reference Material.

Examination of SARS-CoV-2 serological test results from multiple commercial and laboratory platforms with an in-house serum panel

Evaluation of Serological SARS-CoV-2 Lateral Flow Assays for Rapid Point of Care Testing

Performance verification of anti-SARS-CoV-2-specific antibody detection by using four chemiluminescence immunoassay systems

Evaluation of five immunoassays and one lateral flow immunochromatography for anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies detection

Serological differentiation between COVID-19 and SARS infections

Comparison of the diagnostic efficacy between two PCR test kits for SARS‐CoV‐2 nucleic acid detection

Clinical performance of the Panbio assay for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 IgM and IgG in COVID-19 patients

Evaluation of the EUROIMMUN Anti-SARS-CoV-2 ELISA Assay for detection of IgA and IgG antibodies

Diagnosis with Metagenomic Next-Generation Sequencing (mNGS) technology and real-time PCR for SARS-CoV-2 Omicron detection using various nasopharyngeal swabs in SARS-CoV-2 Omicron