Multidisciplinary assessment of the Abbott BinaxNOW SARS-CoV-2 point-of-care antigen test in the context of emerging viral variants and self-administration
Jennifer K. Frediani, Joshua M. Levy, Anuradha Rao, Leda Bassit, Janet Figueroa, Miriam B. Vos, Anna Wood, Robert C. Jerris, Van Leung‐Pineda, Mark D. Gonzalez, Beverly Barton Rogers, Maud Mavigner, Raymond F. Schinazi, Nils Schoof, Jesse J. Waggoner, Russell R. Kempker, Paulina A. Rebolledo, Jared O’Neal, Cheryl Stone, Ann Chahroudi, Claudia R. Morris, Allie Suessmith, Julie Sullivan, Sarah Farmer, Amanda Foster, John D. Roback, Thanuja Ramachandra, CaDeidre Washington, Kristie Le, María Cordero, Annette Esper, Eric J. Nehl, Yun F. Wang, Erika A. Tyburski, Greg S. Martin, Wilbur A. Lam
Abstract
While there has been significant progress in the development of rapid COVID-19 diagnostics, as the pandemic unfolds, new challenges have emerged, including whether these technologies can reliably detect the more infectious variants of concern and be viably deployed in non-clinical settings as "self-tests". Multidisciplinary evaluation of the Abbott BinaxNOW COVID-19 Ag Card (BinaxNOW, a widely used rapid antigen test, included limit of detection, variant detection, test performance across different age-groups, and usability with self/caregiver-administration. While BinaxNOW detected the highly infectious variants, B.1.1.7 (Alpha) first identified in the UK, B.1.351 (Beta) first identified in South Africa, P.1 (Gamma) first identified in Brazil, B.1.617.2 (Delta) first identified in India and B.1.2, a non-VOC, test sensitivity decreased with decreasing viral loads. Moreover, BinaxNOW sensitivity trended lower when devices were performed by patients/caregivers themselves compared to trained clinical staff, despite universally high usability assessments following self/caregiver-administration among different age groups. Overall, these data indicate that while BinaxNOW accurately detects the new viral variants, as rapid COVID-19 tests enter the home, their already lower sensitivities compared to RT-PCR may decrease even more due to user error.