Improving Real-world Antigen Test Sensitivity Estimation through Target Distribution Balancing
Miguel Bosch,Raul Colmenares,Adriana Moreno,Jose Arocha,Sina Hoche,Auris Garcia,Dawlyn Garcia,Daniela Holl,Lyndsey Rudtner,Nol Salcedo,Irene Bosch
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.10.25.24316137
2024-10-28
Abstract:Sensitivity is a key measure of lateral-flow antigen test (AT) performance, typically compared against qRT-PCR as the gold standard. For COVID-19, diagnostic sensitivity assesses the ability of ATs to detect SARS-CoV-2 nucleoprotein. However, sensitivity estimates can be strongly skewed by variations of the target concentrations within the clinical sample sets. Independent studies evaluating ATs from different manufacturers often display disparate target concentration distributions, making it difficult to compare sensitivity across products. We propose a new methodology to enhance the accuracy of sensitivity calculations, ensuring more reliable comparisons across ATs.
Sensitivity is estimated by modeling the probability of positive agreement (PPA) as a function of qRT-PCR cycle thresholds (Cts) via logistic regression of antigen test results. Raw sensitivity is calculated as the ratio of antigen test positives to total PCR positives. Adjusted sensitivity is derived by applying the PPA function to a reference concentration distribution, enabling uniform sensitivity comparisons across tests. This approach minimizes the impact of uneven sampling and external factors, as demonstrated using clinical data from a study in Chelsea, Massachusetts, USA.
Over two years, paired antigen and PCR positive tests from four AT suppliers were analyzed: A (211 tests), B (156), C (85), and D (43). The qRT-PCR Ct distributions varied, with suppliers A and D having more high viral load samples, while supplier C had more low viral load samples, causing significant discrepancies in raw sensitivity. Using the PPA function estimated from each supplier's dataset, we calculated the corresponding adjusted sensitivities for common reference Ct distributions, highlighting how sample heterogeneity impacts raw sensitivity. Our approach successfully mitigates this variability, allowing for more accurate sensitivity comparisons.
This study demonstrates that sensitivity estimates from real-world data are susceptible to deviations caused by external factors, particularly the heterogeneity of qRT-PCR Ct distributions across studies. We present data supporting a novel methodology that adjusts for this variability by calculating the PPA function from raw data and determining the expected sensitivity based on a reference distribution of qRT-PCR Cts, allowing for more consistent and accurate sensitivity assessments.
Health Informatics