Diagnostic accuracy of Panbio™ rapid antigen test for SARS-CoV-2 in paediatric population.

BACKGROUND: Rapid antigen-detection tests (Ag-RDTs) are used to diagnose SARS-CoV-2 infection. Real-world studies of Ag-RDTs are necessary to evaluate their diagnostic yield in paediatric patients. Our aim was to evaluate the accuracy of the Panbio™ Rapid Antigen Test for SARS-CoV-2 in the setting of a primary health care centre (PHC), with use of the Reverse Transcription-Polymerase Chain Reaction (RT-PCR) as gold standard. METHODS: This prospective diagnostic study was conducted at PHCs in Mallorca, Spain. Patients were ≤ 18 years-old that attended sites for RT-PCR testing due to symptoms suggestive of infection (fever, headache, nasal congestion and dry cough, among others) or epidemiological exposure (close contacts). Two samples were collected: a nasal mid-turbinate sample for Ag-RDTs and a nasopharyngeal swab for RT-PCR testing. The sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values of the AgRDT were calculated using the RT-PCR results as the reference. RESULTS: We examined 1142 participants from 0 to 18 years (47.5% female, mean age 8.9 ± 4.8 years, median 9.0 [5.0-13.0]). There were 84 positive RT-PCR results (pre-test probability of 7.3%) and 52 positive Ag-RDT results. The sensitivity of the Ag-RDT was 59.5% (95% Confidence Interval (CI): 48.2-69.9%), the specificity was 99.8% (95%CI: 99.2-99.9%), the positive predictive value was 96.1% (95%CI: 85.6-99.4%), and the negative predictive value was 96.8% (95%CI: 95.6-97.7%). The sensitivity for individuals referred by a general practitioner (GP) or paediatrician due to symptoms was 71.4% (95%CI: 51.5-86.0%) and for asymptomatic individuals was 50.0% (95%CI: 9.1-90.8%). The specificity was greater than 98.9% overall and in all subgroups. The sensitivity was 73.0% (95%CI: 52.0-87.5%) for referred patients due to symptoms and who were tested within 5 days since symptom onset. No significant statistical differences between any groups were found. There were 34 false-negative Ag-RDT results (40.5%) and 2 false-positive Ag-RDT results (0.2%). CONCLUSION: The sensitivity of the Panbio™ Test in paediatric individuals is below the minimum of 80% recommended by the World Health Organization for Ag-RDTs. This test had better accuracy in individuals referred by a GP or paediatrician due to symptoms, rather than those who were asymptomatic or referred due to epidemiological exposure. The RT-PCR test using a nasopharyngeal swab is accurate, but a less invasive alternative that has better sensitivity than the Panbio™ Test is needed for paediatric populations.

Efficacy of high doses of penicillin versus amoxicillin in the treatment of uncomplicated community acquired pneumonia in adults. A non-inferiority controlled clinical trial.

INTRODUCTION: Community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) is treated with penicillin in some northern European countries. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate whether high-dose penicillin V is as effective as high-dose amoxicillin for the treatment of non-severe CAP. DESIGN: Multicentre, parallel, double-blind, controlled, randomized clinical trial. SETTING: 31 primary care centers in Spain. PARTICIPANTS: Patients from 18 to 75 years of age with no significant associated comorbidity and with symptoms of lower respiratory tract infection and radiological confirmation of CAP were randomized to receive either penicillin V 1.6 million units, or amoxicillin 1000mg three times per day for 10 days. MAIN MEASUREMENTS: The main outcome was clinical cure at 14 days, and the primary hypothesis was that penicillin V would be non-inferior to amoxicillin with regard to this outcome, with a margin of 15% for the difference in proportions. EudraCT register 2012-003511-63. RESULTS: A total of 43 subjects (amoxicillin: 28; penicillin: 15) were randomized. Clinical cure was observed in 10 (90.9%) patients assigned to penicillin and in 25 (100%) patients assigned to amoxicillin with a difference of -9.1% (95% CI, -41.3% to 6.4%; p=.951) for non-inferiority. In the intention-to-treat analysis, amoxicillin was found to be 28.6% superior to penicillin (95% CI, 7.3-58.1%; p=.009 for superiority). The number of adverse events was similar in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: There was a trend favoring high-dose amoxicillin versus high-dose penicillin in adults with uncomplicated CAP. The main limitation of this trial was the low statistical power due to the low number of patients included.

Efficacy of high doses of oral penicillin versus amoxicillin in the treatment of adults with non-severe pneumonia attended in the community: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Streptococcus pneumoniae is the bacterial agent which most frequently causes pneumonia. In some Scandinavian countries, this infection is treated with penicillin V since the resistances of pneumococci to this antibiotic are low. Four reasons justify the undertaking of this study; firstly, the cut-off points which determine whether a pneumococcus is susceptible or resistant to penicillin have changed in 2008 and according to some studies published recently the pneumococcal resistances to penicillin in Spain have fallen drastically, with only 0.9% of the strains being resistant to oral penicillin (minimum inhibitory concentration>2 µg/ml); secondly, there is no correlation between pneumococcal infection by a strain resistant to penicillin and therapeutic failure in pneumonia; thirdly, the use of narrow-spectrum antibiotics is urgently needed because of the dearth of new antimicrobials and the link observed between consumption of broad-spectrum antibiotics and emergence and spread of antibacterial resistance; and fourthly, no clinical study comparing amoxicillin and penicillin V in pneumonia in adults has been published. Our aim is to determine whether high-dose penicillin V is as effective as high-dose amoxicillin for the treatment of uncomplicated community-acquired pneumonia. METHODS: We will perform a parallel group, randomised, double-blind, trial in primary healthcare centres in Spain. Patients aged 18 to 65 without significant associated comorbidity attending the physician with signs and symptoms of lower respiratory tract infection and radiological confirmation of the diagnosis of pneumonia will be randomly assigned to either penicillin V 1.6 million units thrice-daily during 10 days or amoxicillin 1,000 mg thrice-daily during 10 days. The main outcome will be clinical cure at 14 days, defined as absence of fever, resolution or improvement of cough, improvement of general wellbeing and resolution or reduction of crackles indicating that no other antimicrobial treatment will be necessary. Any clinical result other than the anterior will be considered as treatment failure. A total of 210 patients will be recruited to detect a non-inferiority margin of 15% between the two treatments with a minimum power of 80% considering an alpha error of 2.5% for a unilateral hypothesis and maximum possible losses of 15%. DISCUSSION: This pragmatic trial addresses the long-standing hypothesis that the administration of high doses of a narrow-spectrum antibiotic (penicillin V) in patients with non-severe pneumonia attended in the community is not less effective than high doses of amoxicillin (treatment currently recommended) in patients under the age of 65 years. TRIAL REGISTRATION: EudraCT number 2012-003511-63.

Panbio™ rapid antigen test for SARS-CoV-2 has acceptable accuracy in symptomatic patients in primary health care.

OBJECTIVES: We aimed to evaluate the accuracy of the Panbio™ Ag-RDT at primary health care (PHC) centers and test sites in symptomatic patients and close contacts, using the Reverse-Transcription Polymerase Chain Reaction (RT-PCR) test as the gold standard. METHODS: The study was conducted in four PHC centers and two test sites in Mallorca, Spain. Consecutive patients older than 18 years, attending the sites for RT-PCR testing were included. Two nasopharyngeal samples were collected, one for RT-PCR and the other was processed on-site using the Panbio™ rapid antigen test kit for SARS-CoV-2. The sensitivity and specificity were calculated using RT-PCR as the reference, and the predictive values using the pretest probability results for each analyzed group. FINDINGS: A total of 1369 participants were included; mean age 42.5 ±â€¯14.9 years and 54.3% women. The overall prevalence was 10.2%. Most participants (70.6%) presented within 5 days of the onset of symptoms. The overall sensitivity was of 71.4% (95% CI: 63.1%, 78.7%), the specificity of 99.8% (95% CI: 99.4%, 99.9%), the positive predictive value of 98.0% (95% CI: 93.0%, 99.7%) and a negative predictive value of 96.8% (95% CI: 95.7%, 97.7%). The sensitivity was higher in symptomatic patients, in those arriving within 5 days since symptom onset and in those with high viral load. INTERPRETATION: Ag-RDT had relatively good performance characteristics in suspected symptomatic patients within five days since the onset of symptoms. However, our data do not support the sole use of Panbio™ Ag-RDT in asymptomatic individuals. FUNDING: None.

Passive smoking at home is a risk factor for community-acquired pneumonia in older adults: a population-based case-control study.

OBJECTIVE: To assess whether passive smoking exposure at home is a risk factor for community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) in adults. SETTING: A population-based case-control study was designed in a Mediterranean area with 860 000 inhabitants >14 years of age. PARTICIPANTS: 1003 participants who had never smoked were recruited. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Risk factors for CAP, including home exposure to passive smoking, were registered. All new cases of CAP in a well-defined population were consecutively recruited during a 12-month period. METHODS: A population-based case-control study was designed to assess risk factors for CAP, including home exposure to passive smoking. All new cases of CAP in a well-defined population were consecutively recruited during a 12-month period. The subgroup of never smokers was selected for the present analysis. RESULTS: The study sample included 471 patients with CAP and 532 controls who had never smoked. The annual incidence of CAP was estimated to be 1.14 cases×10(-3) inhabitants in passive smokers and 0.90×10(-3) in non-passive smokers (risk ratio (RR) 1.26; 95% CI 1.02 to 1.55) in the whole sample. In participants ≥65 years of age, this incidence was 2.50×10(-3) in passive smokers and 1.69×10(-3) in non-passive smokers (RR 1.48, 95% CI 1.08 to 2.03). In this last age group, the percentage of passive smokers in cases and controls was 26% and 18.1%, respectively (p=0.039), with a crude OR of 1.59 (95% CI 1.02 to 2.38) and an adjusted (by age and sex) OR of 1.56 (95% CI 1.00 to 2.45). CONCLUSIONS: Passive smoking at home is a risk factor for CAP in older adults (65 years or more).

Relationship between the use of inhaled steroids for chronic respiratory diseases and early outcomes in community-acquired pneumonia.

BACKGROUND: The role of inhaled steroids in patients with chronic respiratory diseases is a matter of debate due to the potential effect on the development and prognosis of community-acquired pneumonia (CAP). We assessed whether treatment with inhaled steroids in patients with chronic bronchitis, COPD or asthma and CAP may affect early outcome of the acute pneumonic episode. METHODS: Over 1-year period, all population-based cases of CAP in patients with chronic bronchitis, COPD or asthma were registered. Use of inhaled steroids were registered and patients were followed up to 30 days after diagnosis to assess severity of CAP and clinical course (hospital admission, ICU admission and mortality). RESULTS: Of 473 patients who fulfilled the selection criteria, inhaled steroids were regularly used by 109 (23%). In the overall sample, inhaled steroids were associated with a higher risk of hospitalization (OR=1.96, p = 0.002) in the bivariate analysis, but this effect disappeared after adjusting by other severity-related factors (adjusted OR=1.08, p=0.787). This effect on hospitalization also disappeared when considering only patients with asthma (OR=1.38, p=0.542), with COPD alone (OR=4.68, p=0.194), but a protective effect was observed in CB patients (OR=0.15, p=0.027). Inhaled steroids showed no association with ICU admission, days to clinical recovery and mortality in the overall sample and in any disease subgroup. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with inhaled steroids is not a prognostic factor in COPD and asthmatic patients with CAP, but could prevent hospitalization for CAP in patients with clinical criteria of chronic bronchitis.