The Doherty Institute believe these tests “ … have an adequate level of specificity and (that) positive antibody results in a symptomatic individual could be presumed to be positive for COVID-19”.
They have qualified this by recommending that the test not be used until “at least two weeks post onset of symptoms” and also that they should be confirmed with a laboratory test, presumably a nucleic acid test.
As I suggest in the post referred to above, Doherty are also saying that after these two weeks Wondfo is clearly better than the others, being “50% better than Alltest; three and a half times better than VivaChek and two and a half times better than CTK” in this regard.
Hopefully this means Wondfo would often be the test of choice. The question arises as to use for what purposes.
There would seem to be two particular relevant uses.
One would obviously be in combination with a nucleic acid test and the recent CDY announcement refers to use in combination with Ustar Biotechnologies diagnostics.
The second use would seem to be screening of a population where the level of infection that had occurred within that population were not accurately known - for example, unlike in Australia that apparently had the highest test rate in the word, where a high level of testing was not or could not be carried out. Perhaps therefore more relevant to other countries than to Australia.
It might be that CDY’s recent announcement of acting in combination with a nucleic acid diagnosis partner and broadening the geographic reach had more significance than was immediately obvious.
poorinvestor
Post-market evaluation of serology-based point of care tests, page-9
Add to My Watchlist
What is My Watchlist?
