(1) Background: Laboratory-based molecular assays are the gold standard to detect SARS-CoV-2. In resource-limited settings, the implementation of these assays has been hampered by operational challenges and long turnaround times. Rapid antigen detection tests are an attractive alternative. Our aim is to evaluate the clinical performance of two SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen tests during a high transmission period. (2) Methods: A total of 1277 patients seeking SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis were enrolled at four health facilities. Nasopharyngeal swabs for rapid antigen and real time PCR testing were collected for each patient. Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, misclassification rate, and agreement were determined. (3) Results: The overall sensitivity of Panbio COVID-19 was 41.3% (95% CI: 34.6–48.4%) and the specificity was 98.2% (95% CI: 96.2–99.3%). The Standard Q had an overall sensitivity and specificity of 45.0% (95% CI: 39.9–50.2%) and 97.6% (95% CI: 95.3–99.0%), respectively. The positive predictive value of a positive test was 93.3% and 95.4% for the Panbio and Standard Q Ag-RDTs, respectively. A higher sensitivity of 43.2% and 49.4% was observed in symptomatic cases for the Panbio and Standard Q Ag-RDTs, respectively. (4) Conclusions: Despite the overall low sensitivity, the two evaluated rapid tests are useful to improve the diagnosis of symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infections during high transmission periods.

Background: In resource-poor countries, antigen-based rapid tests (Ag-RDTs) performed at primary healthcare and community settings improved access to SARS-CoV-2 diagnostics. However, the technical skills and biosafety requirements inherent to nasopharyngeal and oropharyngeal (OP) specimens limit the scale-up of SARS-CoV-2 testing. The collection of nasal-swabs is programmatically viable, but its performance has not been evaluated in resource-poor settings. Methods: We first evaluated the performance of SteriPack self-collected nasal swabs for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 by real-time PCR in 1498 consecutively enrolled patients with suspected infection. Next, we evaluated the clinical performance of three nasal swab-based Ag-RDTs against real-time PCR on OP specimens. Results: The sensitivity of nasal swabs was 80.6% [95% CI: 75.3–85.2%] compared to OP specimens. There was a good correlation (r = 0.58; p < 0.0001) between Ct values of 213 positive cases obtained using nasal and OP swabs. Our findings show sensitivities of 79.7% [95% CI: 73.3–85.1%] for Panbio COVID-19 Ag-RDT, 59.6% [95% CI: 55.2–63.8%] for COVIOS Ag-RDT, and 78.0% [95% CI: 73.5–82.0%] for the LumiraDx SARS-CoV-2 Ag-RDT. Conclusions: In our setting, the COVIOS Ag-RDT did not meet WHO requirements. Nasal swab-based Ag-RDTs for SARS-CoV-2 detection constitute a viable and accurate diagnostic option in resource-poor settings.

The mycobacteriological analysis of sputum samples is the gold standard for tuberculosis diagnosis and treatment monitoring. However, sputum production can be challenging after the initiation of TB treatment. As a possible alternative, we therefore investigated the dynamics of neutrophil-derived soluble inflammatory mediators during TB treatment in relation to HIV ART status and the severity of lung impairment. Plasma samples of TB patients with (N = 47) and without HIV (N = 21) were analyzed at baseline, month 2, month 6 (end of TB treatment) and month 12. Plasma levels of MMP-1, MMP-8, MPO and S100A8 markedly decreased over the course of TB treatment and remained at similar levels thereafter. Post-TB treatment initiation, significantly elevated plasma levels of MMP-8 were detected in TB patients living with HIV, especially if they were not receiving ART treatment at baseline. Our data confirm that the plasma levels of neutrophil-based biomarkers can be used as candidate surrogate markers for TB treatment outcome and HIV-infection influenced MMP-8 and S100A8 levels. Future studies to validate our results and to understand the dynamics of neutrophils-based biomarkers post-TB treatment are needed.