Saliva sampling and its direct lysis is an excellent option for SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis in paediatric patients: comparison with the PanBio COVID-19 antigen rapid test in symptomatic and asymptomatic children

Introduction. Lateral flow test (LFTs) have been used as an alternative to reverse transcription quantitative PCR (RT- qPCR) in point -of -care testing. Despite their benefits, the sensitivity of LFTs may be low and is affected by several factors. We have previously reported the feasibility of using direct lysis of individual or pools of saliva samples from symptomatic and asymptomatic patients as a source of viral genomes for detection by RT- qPCR.Hypothesis. Direct lysed saliva is more sensitive than antigen tests to detect severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV- 2) in samples from children.Aim. Our goals here were to valuate the specificity and sensitivity of the PanBio COVID- 19 antigen rapid test device (Ag- RTD) compared with RT- qPCR of direct lysed saliva.Methodology. We evaluated the performance of the PanBio COVID- 19 Ag- RTD in comparison to RT- qPCR direct lysed saliva from paired samples of 256 symptomatic and 242 asymptomatic paediatric patients.Results. Overall, although there were no differences in the specificity (96.6%), we found a lower sensitivity (64.3%) of the PanBio Ag- test RTD compared to saliva in both symptomatic and asymptomatic patients. In addition, the sensitivity of PanBio was not correlated with the viral load present in the samples.Conclusion. Our data highlight the benefits of using RT- qPCR and saliva samples for SARS- CoV- 2 detection, particularly in paediatric patients.