Background: Currently, assessing the diagnostic performance of new laboratory tests assumes a perfect reference standard, which is rarely the case. Wrong classifications of the true disease status will inevitably lead to biased estimates of sensitivity and specificity.
Objectives: Using Bayesian' latent class models (BLCMs), an approach that does not assume a perfect reference standard, we re-analyzed data of a large prospective observational study assessing the diagnostic accuracy of an antigen test for the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection in clinical practice.
Methods: A cohort of consecutive patients presenting to a COVID-19 testing facility affiliated with a Swiss University Hospital were recruited (n = 1465). Two real-time PCR tests were conducted in parallel with the Roche/SD Biosensor rapid antigen test on nasopharyngeal swabs. A two-test (PCR and antigen test), three-population BLCM was fitted to the frequencies of paired test results.
Results: Based on the BLCM, the sensitivities of the RT-PCR and the Roche/SD Biosensor rapid antigen test were 98.5% [95% CRI 94.8;100] and 82.7% [95% CRI 66.8;100]. The specificities were 97.7% [96.1;99.7] and 99.9% [95% CRI 99.6;100].
Conclusions: Applying the BLCM, the diagnostic accuracy of RT-PCR was high but not perfect. In contrast to previous results, the sensitivity of the antigen test was higher. Our results suggest that BLCMs are valuable tools for investigating the diagnostic performance of laboratory tests in the absence of perfect reference standard.
Keywords: BLCM; diagnostic accuracy; no gold standard models.