Impact of COVID-19 pre-test probability on positive predictive value of high cycle threshold SARS-CoV-2 real-time reverse transcription PCR test results

Background Performance characteristics of SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid detection assays are understudied within contexts of low pre-test probability, including screening asymptomatic persons without epidemiological links to confirmed cases, or asymptomatic surveillance testing. SARS-CoV-2 detection without symptoms may represent resolved infection with persistent RNA shedding, presymptomatic or asymptomatic infection, or a false positive test. This study assessed clinical specificity of SARS-CoV-2 real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR) assays by retesting positive specimens from five pre-test probability groups ranging from high to low with an alternate assay. Materials and Methods A total of 122 rRT-PCR positive specimens collected from unique patients between March and July 2020 were retested using a laboratory-developed nested RT-PCR assay targeting the RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp) gene followed by Sanger sequencing. Results Significantly less positive results in the lowest pre-test probability group (facilities with institution-wide screening having ≤ 3 positive asymptomatic cases) were reproduced with the nested RdRp gene RT-PCR assay than in all other groups combined (5/32, 15·6% vs 61/90, 68%; p <0·0001), and in each subgroup with higher pre-test probability (individual subgroup range 50·0% to 85·0%). Conclusions A higher proportion of false-positive test results are likely with lower pre-test probability. Positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR results should be interpreted within the context of patient history, clinical setting, known exposure, and estimated community disease prevalence. Large-scale SARS-CoV-2 screening testing initiatives among low pre-test probability populations should be evaluated thoroughly prior to implementation given the risk of false positives and consequent potential for harm at the individual and population level. ### Competing Interest Statement The authors have declared no competing interest. ### Funding Statement This work was funded by Public Health Ontario. ### Author Declarations I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained. Yes The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below: The Public Health Ontario Ethics Review Board determined that this project is exempt from research ethics committee review, as it describes analyses that were completed at PHO Laboratory as part of routine clinical respiratory testing during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in Ontario and are therefore considered public health practice, not research All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived. Yes I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance). Yes I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable. Yes Data requests can be made to the corresponding author for institutional review.