Performance of Mologic lft18 Nov 2021 17:37
Good evening all,
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-021-97489-9
Many of you may have already seen this article, but it shows the truly outstanding results it can bring to the table. I would love to know what is causing it to take so long to gain approval if the performance is as good as it looks.
The report also states that the test meet who and dhsc minimal analytical sensitivity “ Here, we present the analytical performance of 19 antigen rapid tests, which are currently on the market and in use in multiple countries. Analytical LODs are a useful proxy of clinical sensitivity, and the most standardized way to evaluate multiple antigen tests head-to-head, as each test requires a separate swab from patients. An approximate LOD of?=?5.0?×?102 pfu/ml (˜ 1.0?×?106 copies/ml) calculated using direct culture supernatant, has been proposed as the minimal analytical sensitivity by the WHO and the Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC, U.K.)25,26. Fourteen of the 19 marketed Ag-RDTs evaluated in this study fulfill this requirement (ActiveXpress, Bioeasy, Espline, Innova, Mologic, NowCheck, PanBio, Excalibur, RespiStrip, Joysbio, Roche, Standard-F, Standard-Q, Sure-Status and Orient).”
Although this has now been superceded.
GLA