BackgroundNasopharyngeal antigen Rapid Diagnostic Tests (RDTs) and saliva RT-PCR have shown variable performance to detect SARS-CoV-2.MethodsIn October 2020, we conducted a prospective trial involving patients presenting at testing centers with symptoms of COVID-19. We compared detection rates and performance of RDT, saliva PCR and nasopharyngeal (NP) PCR.ResultsOut of 949 patients enrolled, 928 patients had all three tests. Detection rates were 35.2% (95%CI 32.2-38.4%) by RDT, 39.8% (36.6-43.0%) by saliva PCR, 40.1% (36.9-43.3%) by NP PCR, and 41.5% (38.3-44.7%) by any test. For those with viral loads (VL) ≥106 copies/ml, detection rates were 30.3% (27.3-33.3), 31.4% (28.4-34.5), 31.5% (28.5-34.6), and 31.6% (28.6-34.7%) respectively.Sensitivity of RDT compared to NP PCR was 87.4% (83.6-90.6%) for all positive patients and 96.5% (93.6-98.3%) for those with VL≥106. Sensitivity of STANDARD-Q®, Panbio™ and COVID-VIRO® Ag tests were 92.9% (86.4-96.9%), 86.1% (78.6-91.7%) and 84.1% (76.9-89.7%), respectively. For those with VL≥106, sensitivities were 96.6% (90.5-99.3%), 97.8% (92.1-99.7%) and 95.3% (89.4-98.5%) respectively. Specificity of RDT was 100% (99.3-100%) compared to any PCR. RDT sensitivity was similar <4 days (87.8%) and ≥4 days (85.7%) after symptoms onset (p=0.6). Sensitivities of saliva and NP PCR were 95.7% (93.1-97.5%) and 96.5% (94.1-98.1%), respectively, compared to the other PCR.ConclusionsThe high performance of RDTs allows rapid identification of COVID cases with immediate isolation of the vast majority of contagious individuals. RDT could be a game changer in primary care practices, and even more so in resource-constrained settings. PCR on saliva can replace NP PCR.ClinicalTrial.gov Identifier: NCT04613310
By use of a respiration chamber, 24-hour energy expenditure (EE), diet-induced thermogenesis (DIT), and basal and sleeping EE were measured in 20 young rural Gambian men during the "hungry" season (weight, 60.8 +/- 1.4 kg) and in a group of 16 European men matched for body composition (weight, 66.9 +/- 1.9 kg). The 24-h EE was lower in Gambian than in European men (2047 +/- 46 vs 2635 +/- 74 kcal/d, p less than 0.001, respectively). Basal EE and sleeping EE were also lower in Gambian than in European men (1.05 +/- 0.02 vs 1.25 +/- 0.02 kcal/min and 1.0 +/- 0.02 vs 1.18 +/- 0.02 kcal/min, p less than 0.01, respectively). DIT was blunted in Gambian compared with European men (6.3 +/- 0.6% vs 12.1 +/- 0.5%, p less than 0.001 respectively). The net efficiency of walking was greater in Gambian than in European men (23.2 +/- 0.3% vs 20.1 +/- 0.4%, p less than 0.001, respectively). A low basal and sleeping EE, a reduced DIT, and a high work efficiency are important energy-sparing mechanisms in Gambian men, which allow them to cope with a marginal level of dietary intake during the hungry season.
Adaptation of 24-h energy expenditure (24-h EE) to seasonal variations in food availability was studied, by using a respiration chamber, in 18 rural Gambian men on three occasions: period 1--at the end of the rainy season, which is characterized by low food availability; period 2--during the nutritionally favorable dry season; and period 3--at the onset of the following rainy season. From periods 1 to 2 body weight increased by 2.8 +/- 0.4 kg, and a rise in 24-h EE was observed (from 8556 +/- 212 kJ/d to 9166 +/- 224 kJ/d), which was correlated to weight change (r = 0.73, P less than 0.001). During period 3, 24-h EE averaged 8740 +/- 194 kJ/d. Diet-induced thermogenesis increased significantly from periods 1 to 2 (5.9 +/- 0.5% to 8.2 +/- 0.8%) and subsequently decreased to 3.6 +/- 0.6% during period 3. In rural Gambian men, metabolic adaptations in response to seasonal changes in food availability are reflected by a decrease in body weight, mainly manifested by a loss of fat-free mass accompanied by a decreased 24-h EE and a lowered diet-induced thermogenesis.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.