Abstract
Introduction C-reactive protein (CRP) is an established acute-phase marker for infection and inflammation, which can help guide clinical decision-making in primary and secondary care. Many European guidelines recommend point-of-care (POC) CRP testing to improve antimicrobial stewardship in primary care. This performance evaluation study assessed the equivalence of the quantitative POC LumiraDx CRP Test compared to a laboratory-based reference method.
Methods Method comparison, matrix equivalency, and precision were evaluated. Plasma samples from secondary care patients presenting with symptoms of infection or inflammation were analyzed centrally using the LumiraDx CRP Test and the reference test (Siemens CRP Extended Range for Dimension® Clinical Chemistry System). The method comparison was conducted used Passing-Bablok regression analysis with prespecified criteria of r≥95 and a slope of 0.95–1.05. The REACT study (NCT05180110) evaluated the equivalence and precision of the testing modalities (fingerstick, venous blood, and plasma samples from the same secondary care patient) using Passing-Bablok regression analysis of the results of the POC LumiraDx CRP Test.
Results In analysis of 320 plasma samples from 110 patients, the POC LumiraDx CRP Test demonstrated close agreement with the reference method, meeting the prespecified performance criteria (r=0.99, slope of 1.05, N=110). Paired replicate precision of the testing modalities was high, with mean %CV of 6.4 (plasma), 6.6 (capillary direct), and 8.1 (venous blood). Passing-Bablok regression showed matrix equivalency for all replicate pairs of the testing modalities, with r values across all sample types of 0.97–0.98.
Conclusion The quantitative POC LumiraDx CRP Test showed very close agreement with the established laboratory-based test when using capillary blood, venous blood, or plasma. The use of capillary blood testing in particular is beneficial in both primary and secondary care, with this portable test system providing rapid quantitative results within 4 minutes, potentiating the ability to help guide clinical decision-making.
Data from two study collections, the NOVEL study and the REACT study with a trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT05180110, were used in this performance evaluation.
Key summary points
C-reactive protein (CRP) measurements are clinical markers for infection and inflammation, commonly used in primary and secondary care
Point-of-care (POC) CRP testing can assist primary care clinicians in making an immediate decision as to whether to prescribe antibiotics while the patient is still at the clinic
POC CRP testing that provides quantitative results near to the patient can be useful in emergency care assessment of patients and in hospital monitoring of antibiotic therapy
The POC LumiraDx CRP Test has demonstrated quantitative results comparable to those obtained using a recognized laboratory system using plasma
The POC LumiraDx CRP Test has also demonstrated matrix equivalence of capillary blood (both direct application and transfer tube), venous blood, and plasma
Competing Interest Statement
Jayne Ellis, Sarah MacLuskie, David Craig, Lucy Lehane, and Graeme McInnes are employees of LumiraDx. James Harnett, Gregor Cameron, Phil Moss and Alasdair Gray declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Clinical Trial
NCT05180110
Funding Statement
This manuscript was funded by LumiraDx. The authors Jayne Ellis, Sarah MacLuskie, David Craig, Lucy Lehane, and Graeme McInnes are employees of LumiraDx.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
Data from two study collections, the NOVEL study and the REACT study with a trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT05180110, were used in this performance evaluation. The NOVEL study complied with the Declaration of Helsinki (2013) and was approved by the West of Scotland Research Ethics Committee 3 (REC number 15/WS/0176 and the Integrated Research Application System ID: 179093). The REACT study took place at three different study sites in the UK (Scotland and England). The REACT study received approval from the South-East Scotland Research Ethics Committee (REC 19/SS/0115) and the Health Research Authority (HRA) and Health and Care Research Wales (HCRW) for the English sites (IRAS 271016). The study protocol (REC 19/SS/0115) complied with the Declaration of Helsinki (2013). All participants provided informed consent prior to participation.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
All data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors.
