Skip to main content
  • ASM
    • Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
    • Applied and Environmental Microbiology
    • Clinical Microbiology Reviews
    • Clinical and Vaccine Immunology
    • EcoSal Plus
    • Eukaryotic Cell
    • Infection and Immunity
    • Journal of Bacteriology
    • Journal of Clinical Microbiology
    • Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education
    • Journal of Virology
    • mBio
    • Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews
    • Microbiology Resource Announcements
    • Microbiology Spectrum
    • Molecular and Cellular Biology
    • mSphere
    • mSystems
  • Log in
  • My alerts
  • My Cart

Main menu

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current Issue
    • Accepted Manuscripts
    • COVID-19 Special Collection
    • Archive
    • Minireviews
  • For Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Scope
    • Editorial Policy
    • Submission, Review, & Publication Processes
    • Organization and Format
    • Errata, Author Corrections, Retractions
    • Illustrations and Tables
    • Nomenclature
    • Abbreviations and Conventions
    • Publication Fees
    • Ethics Resources and Policies
  • About the Journal
    • About JCM
    • Editor in Chief
    • Editorial Board
    • For Reviewers
    • For the Media
    • For Librarians
    • For Advertisers
    • Alerts
    • RSS
    • FAQ
  • Subscribe
    • Members
    • Institutions
  • ASM
    • Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
    • Applied and Environmental Microbiology
    • Clinical Microbiology Reviews
    • Clinical and Vaccine Immunology
    • EcoSal Plus
    • Eukaryotic Cell
    • Infection and Immunity
    • Journal of Bacteriology
    • Journal of Clinical Microbiology
    • Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education
    • Journal of Virology
    • mBio
    • Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews
    • Microbiology Resource Announcements
    • Microbiology Spectrum
    • Molecular and Cellular Biology
    • mSphere
    • mSystems

User menu

  • Log in
  • My alerts
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Journal of Clinical Microbiology
publisher-logosite-logo

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current Issue
    • Accepted Manuscripts
    • COVID-19 Special Collection
    • Archive
    • Minireviews
  • For Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Scope
    • Editorial Policy
    • Submission, Review, & Publication Processes
    • Organization and Format
    • Errata, Author Corrections, Retractions
    • Illustrations and Tables
    • Nomenclature
    • Abbreviations and Conventions
    • Publication Fees
    • Ethics Resources and Policies
  • About the Journal
    • About JCM
    • Editor in Chief
    • Editorial Board
    • For Reviewers
    • For the Media
    • For Librarians
    • For Advertisers
    • Alerts
    • RSS
    • FAQ
  • Subscribe
    • Members
    • Institutions
Virology

Clinical Evaluation of BD Veritor SARS-CoV-2 Point-of-Care Test Performance Compared to PCR-Based Testing and versus the Sofia 2 SARS Antigen Point-of-Care Test

Stephen Young, Stephanie N. Taylor, Catherine L. Cammarata, Katey G. Varnado, Celine Roger-Dalbert, Amanda Montano, Christen Griego-Fullbright, Cameron Burgard, Catherine Fernandez, Karen Eckert, Jeffrey C. Andrews, Huimiao Ren, Joseph Allen, Ronald Ackerman, Charles K. Cooper
Melissa B. Miller, Editor
Stephen Young
aTricore Reference Laboratory, Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Stephanie N. Taylor
bLouisiana State University Health Sciences Center, New Orleans, Louisiana, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Catherine L. Cammarata
bLouisiana State University Health Sciences Center, New Orleans, Louisiana, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Katey G. Varnado
bLouisiana State University Health Sciences Center, New Orleans, Louisiana, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Celine Roger-Dalbert
cBecton, Dickinson and Company, BD Life Sciences—Integrated Diagnostic Solutions, Sparks, Maryland, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Amanda Montano
aTricore Reference Laboratory, Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Christen Griego-Fullbright
aTricore Reference Laboratory, Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Cameron Burgard
aTricore Reference Laboratory, Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Catherine Fernandez
dBecton, Dickinson and Company, BD Life Sciences—Integrated Diagnostic Solutions, San Diego, California, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Karen Eckert
cBecton, Dickinson and Company, BD Life Sciences—Integrated Diagnostic Solutions, Sparks, Maryland, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Jeffrey C. Andrews
cBecton, Dickinson and Company, BD Life Sciences—Integrated Diagnostic Solutions, Sparks, Maryland, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Huimiao Ren
dBecton, Dickinson and Company, BD Life Sciences—Integrated Diagnostic Solutions, San Diego, California, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Joseph Allen
eSTAT Research, Vandalia, Ohio, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Ronald Ackerman
fComprehensive Clinical Research, LLC, West Palm Beach, Florida, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Charles K. Cooper
cBecton, Dickinson and Company, BD Life Sciences—Integrated Diagnostic Solutions, Sparks, Maryland, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Melissa B. Miller
UNC School of Medicine
Roles: Editor
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
DOI: 10.1128/JCM.02338-20
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

ABSTRACT

The clinical performance of the BD Veritor System for Rapid Detection of SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid antigen (Veritor), a chromatographic immunoassay used for SARS-CoV-2 point-of-care testing, was evaluated using nasal specimens from individuals with COVID-19 symptoms. Two studies were completed to determine clinical performance. In the first study, nasal specimens and either nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal specimens from 251 participants with COVID-19 symptoms (≤7 days from symptom onset [DSO], ≥18 years of age) were utilized to compare Veritor with the Lyra SARS-CoV-2 PCR assay (Lyra). In the second study, nasal specimens from 361 participants with COVID-19 symptoms (≤5 DSO, ≥18 years of age) were utilized to compare performance of Veritor to that of the Sofia 2 SARS Antigen FIA test (Sofia 2). The positive, negative, and overall percent agreement (PPA, NPA, and OPA, respectively) were the primary outcomes. In study 1, the PPA for Veritor, compared to Lyra, ranged from 81.8 to 87.5% across the 0 to 1 and 0 to 6 DSO ranges. In study 2, Veritor had PPA, NPA, and OPA values of 97.4, 98.1, and 98.1%, respectively, with Sofia 2. Discordant analysis showed one Lyra positive missed by Veritor and five Lyra positives missed by Sofia 2; one Veritor positive result was negative by Lyra. Veritor met FDA emergency use authorization (EUA) acceptance criteria for SARS-CoV-2 antigen testing for the 0 to 5 and 0 to 6 DSO ranges (PPA values of 83.9% and 82.4%, respectively). Veritor and Sofia 2 showed a high degree of agreement for SARS-CoV-2 detection. The Veritor test allows for more rapid COVID-19 testing utilizing easy-to-collect nasal swabs but demonstrated <100% PPA compared to PCR.

FOOTNOTES

    • Received 9 September 2020.
    • Returned for modification 17 September 2020.
    • Accepted 1 October 2020.
    • Accepted manuscript posted online 6 October 2020.
  • Supplemental material is available online only.

  • Copyright © 2020 Young et al.

This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license.

View Full Text
PreviousNext
Back to top
Download PDF
Citation Tools
Clinical Evaluation of BD Veritor SARS-CoV-2 Point-of-Care Test Performance Compared to PCR-Based Testing and versus the Sofia 2 SARS Antigen Point-of-Care Test
Stephen Young, Stephanie N. Taylor, Catherine L. Cammarata, Katey G. Varnado, Celine Roger-Dalbert, Amanda Montano, Christen Griego-Fullbright, Cameron Burgard, Catherine Fernandez, Karen Eckert, Jeffrey C. Andrews, Huimiao Ren, Joseph Allen, Ronald Ackerman, Charles K. Cooper
Journal of Clinical Microbiology Dec 2020, 59 (1) e02338-20; DOI: 10.1128/JCM.02338-20

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Print

Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email

Thank you for sharing this Journal of Clinical Microbiology article.

NOTE: We request your email address only to inform the recipient that it was you who recommended this article, and that it is not junk mail. We do not retain these email addresses.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Clinical Evaluation of BD Veritor SARS-CoV-2 Point-of-Care Test Performance Compared to PCR-Based Testing and versus the Sofia 2 SARS Antigen Point-of-Care Test
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from Journal of Clinical Microbiology
(Your Name) thought you would be interested in this article in Journal of Clinical Microbiology.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Share
Clinical Evaluation of BD Veritor SARS-CoV-2 Point-of-Care Test Performance Compared to PCR-Based Testing and versus the Sofia 2 SARS Antigen Point-of-Care Test
Stephen Young, Stephanie N. Taylor, Catherine L. Cammarata, Katey G. Varnado, Celine Roger-Dalbert, Amanda Montano, Christen Griego-Fullbright, Cameron Burgard, Catherine Fernandez, Karen Eckert, Jeffrey C. Andrews, Huimiao Ren, Joseph Allen, Ronald Ackerman, Charles K. Cooper
Journal of Clinical Microbiology Dec 2020, 59 (1) e02338-20; DOI: 10.1128/JCM.02338-20
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Top
  • Article
    • ABSTRACT
    • INTRODUCTION
    • MATERIALS AND METHODS
    • RESULTS
    • DISCUSSION
    • ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
    • FOOTNOTES
    • REFERENCES
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

KEYWORDS

COVID-19
SARS-CoV-2
Veritor test
point-of-care test
Sofia 2 test

Related Articles

Cited By...

About

  • About JCM
  • Editor in Chief
  • Board of Editors
  • Editor Conflicts of Interest
  • For Reviewers
  • For the Media
  • For Librarians
  • For Advertisers
  • Alerts
  • RSS
  • FAQ
  • Permissions
  • Journal Announcements

Authors

  • ASM Author Center
  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Article Types
  • Resources for Clinical Microbiologists
  • Ethics
  • Contact Us

Follow #JClinMicro

@ASMicrobiology

       

ASM Journals

ASM journals are the most prominent publications in the field, delivering up-to-date and authoritative coverage of both basic and clinical microbiology.

About ASM | Contact Us | Press Room

 

ASM is a member of

Scientific Society Publisher Alliance

 

American Society for Microbiology
1752 N St. NW
Washington, DC 20036
Phone: (202) 737-3600

 

Copyright © 2021 American Society for Microbiology | Privacy Policy | Website feedback

Print ISSN: 0095-1137; Online ISSN: 1098-660X