Abstract:Background: The SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant, with the main subtypes BA.5.2 and BF.7 in China, led to off-target effects on the S and N genes from December 1, 2022, to January 31, 2023. The kits used for studying and developing these agents were not adequately and independently evaluated. It is important to verify the performance of commercial Real-Time quantitative PCR (RT-qPCR) tests. Objective: We conducted a clinical evaluation of two Real Time SARS-CoV-2 Omicron assays to verify their performance using various detection reagents and clinical specimens. Methods: We performed clinical evaluations of two existing Chinese SARS-CoV-2 Omicron RT-qPCR kits 2019-nCoV nucleic acid diagnostic kits (Fosun Biotechnology, National instrument registration 20203400299, Shanghai, China) and COVID-19 nucleic acid detection kits (eDiagnosis Biomedicine, National instrument registration 20203400212, Wuhan, China) and using BSD (Bondson) (Guangzhou Bondson Biotechnology Co. Ltd, batch number 2022101), quality controls provided by the inspection center and a large number of clinically confirmed specimens. Results: The concordance rates for the Fosun and eDiagnosis kits were 95% and 100%, respectively. The detection limit for the Fosun and eDiagnosis kits was verified to be 300 copies/mL and 500 copies/mL. The Fosun assay exhibited the largest coefficient of variation (CV) for ORF1ab and N gene at the detection limit concentration (4.80%, 3.49%), whereas eDiagnosis showed a smaller CV (0.93%, 1.10%). In the reference product from the Hangzhou Clinical Laboratory Center test, it was found that Fosun had the lowest sensitivity of 93.47% and a specificity of 100%, while eDiagnosis exhibited 100% for both sensitivity and specificity. The lowest single target gene detection rate of Fosun reagents was 68.7% for the ORF1ab gene and 87.5% for the N gene, while eDiagnosis detection rate was 100%. Among the clinical group S specimens, the missed detection rate of the Fosun reagent was 10.9%, which was higher than the 3.9% of eDiagnosis. However, there was no significant difference in the clinical diagnostic efficiency of the two reagents. Conclusions: The ORF1ab and N assays of SARS-CoV-2 Omicron on the eDiagnosis platform yielded higher values compared to those on the Fosun platform. Consequently, the eDiagnosis kit has also been used as standard detection reagents. Considering that the Fosun reagent has a relatively low detection limit and targets three single genes, it is more advantageous as a confirmatory reagent for the new museum.

Detection of the Omicron Variant Virus With the Abbott BinaxNow SARS-CoV-2 Rapid Antigen Assay

Evaluation of Abbott BinaxNOW Rapid Antigen Test for SARS-CoV-2 Infection at Two Community-Based Testing Sites — Pima County, Arizona, November 3–17, 2020

Clinical Evaluation and Utilization of Multiple Molecular In Vitro Diagnostic Assays for the Detection of SARS-CoV-2

Performance of Abbott ID Now COVID-19 Rapid Nucleic Acid Amplification Test Using Nasopharyngeal Swabs Transported in Viral Transport Media and Dry Nasal Swabs in a New York City Academic Institution

Diagnostic performance of rapid antigen testing for SARS-CoV-2: the COVid-19 AntiGen (COVAG) extension study

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

Gold nanoparticle-based immunochromatographic assay for rapid detection of the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant

Diagnostic accuracy of rapid antigen tests for detection of Delta and Omicron variants of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2: Direct evidence from prospective clinical settings

National External Quality Assessment for Molecular Detection of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Delta Variant

Rapid and Accurate Detection of SARS Coronavirus 2 by Nanopore Amplicon Sequencing

A Comparison Study of the Detection Limit of Omicron SARS-CoV-2 Nucleocapsid by Various Rapid Antigen Tests

Diagnostic Accuracy of the Abbott BinaxNOW COVID‐19 Antigen Card Test, Puerto Rico

Wide Real-Life Data Support Reduced Sensitivity of Antigen Tests for Omicron SARS-CoV-2 Infections

Comparison of Abbott ID NOW, a novel isothermal amplification based COVID-19 diagnostic method with RTPCR

Temporal Trend of the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron Variant and RSV in the Nasal Cavity and Accuracy of the Newly Developed Antigen-Detecting Rapid Diagnostic Test

Monoclonal Antibodies against Nucleocapsid Protein of SARS-CoV-2 Variants for Detection of COVID-19

Evaluating a novel, highly sensitive, and quantitative reagent for detecting SARS-CoV-2 antigen

Performance Comparison of the Cobas® Liat® and Cepheid® GeneXpert® Systems on SARS-CoV-2 Detection in Nasopharyngeal Swab and Posterior Oropharyngeal Saliva.

Nanoparticle-Supported, Rapid, Digital Quantification of Neutralizing Antibodies Against SARS-CoV-2 Variants

Analysis and Validation of a Highly Sensitive One-Step Nested Quantitative Real-Time Polymerase Chain Reaction Assay for Specific Detection of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2

Comparison of the analytical sensitivity of seven commonly used commercial SARS-CoV-2 automated molecular assays