Skip to main content

New story in Health from Time: New Coronavirus Test Provides Results In As Few As Five Minutes, According to Manufacturer



On March 27, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration granted emergency use to Abbott Laboratories for its rapid COVID-19 test designed for doctor’s offices, urgent care centers and smaller hospitals without complex testing labs. According to the Illinois-based company, the test can give positive results in as little as five minutes, and negative results in about 13 minutes.

The test runs on Abbot’s ID NOW device, which is about the size of the toaster, and is currently used by many sites to quickly test for flu, strep and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) while patients wait. For COVID-19, health providers would have to order an additional $40 cartridge, about the size of a replacement ink cartridge for printers, specifically developed to pick up genetic signatures of the SARS-CoV-2 virus. Most insurers have pledged to cover the cost of the test, which is about the same price as the ID NOW test for flu, without additional costs to patients who qualify.

The Abbot test—like the gold standard COVID-19 test developed by the U.S. government— uses chemicals to shatter the virus’ outer shell so it spills out its genetic material, in the form of RNA. Chemical reactions then amplify that genetic material so special molecular probes in the test solution can pick up even small amounts of virus. That’s where the rapid test differs from the others in use right now; with the traditional technology, that amplification process requires repeatedly cycling the temperature of the chemical reactions from low to medium to high and back down again. The ID NOW device can perform the genetic expansion at a constant temperature, which means it can spit out results more quickly.

So why aren’t all COVID-19 tests run using the faster technology? One reason has to do with volume; traditional genetic tests can process hundreds or even thousands of tests a day; the ID NOW system can only run about four samples an hour. And while traditional tests may take longer to produce results, researchers don’t need to spend as much time developing the test itself so it can start testing people sooner. The rapid test “takes quite a bit of optimization and refining,” says John Frels, vice president of research and development at Abbott Diagnostics. That means it requires more up front development time and takes longer to get up and running.

For doctor’s offices, urgent care centers and smaller hospitals without complex lab facilities on site, the automated test could be a game changer. Doctors could run the test while patients wait, and provide results in an few minutes, rather than a few days. (Having the results could help them better advise people about how stringently they need to self-isolate and change their behavior to protect their families and friends.) Frels says that if a patient has high levels of virus in their sample—taken from the back of the throat and nose—the test’s detector can hit the threshold for a positive diagnosis in as few five minutes. (The full test runs for 15 minutes, so for people with lesser amounts of virus, the molecular reactions continue trying to find as much virus as possible in the sample.)

The portable device also may signal a sea change in the way health care will be delivered in coming years; while the rapid testing platform was initially used for a few respiratory diseases, applying it in an emergency pandemic setting could scale up testing rapidly and suppress a rising tide of transmission. Frels says that Abbott is ramping up production of COVID-19 test cartridges and plans to distribute enough to enable 50,000 tests per day by next week.

Labels:

Popular posts from this blog

New story in Health from Time: Here’s How Quickly Coronavirus Is Spreading in Your State

The novel coronavirus pandemic is a global crisis, a national emergency and a local nightmare. But while a great deal of the focus in the U.S. has been on the federal government’s response, widely criticized as slow and halting , the picture on the ground remains very different in different parts of the country. A TIME analysis of the per capita spread of the epidemic in all 50 states and Washington, D.C. found considerable range in the rate of contagion, and, in some parts of the country, a significant disparity compared to the national figure. The U.S., unlike nations such as South Korea and now Italy , has yet to show signs of bringing the runaway spread of the virus under control. However, while no single state is yet showing strong signs of bending the curve , some are faring much worse than others. The following graphic plots the rise in the total confirmed cases of COVID-19 per 100,000 residents in each state, plotted by the day that each state reported its first case.
Read more

New story in Health from Time: We Need to Take Care of the Growing Number of Long-term COVID-19 Patients

On July 7, 2020, the Boston Red Sox pitcher Eduardo Rodriguez tested positive for the new coronavirus. He was scheduled to start Opening Day for the Sox, but the virus had other plans— damaging Rodriguez’s heart and causing a condition called myocarditis (inflammation of the heart muscle). Now the previously fit 27-year old ace left-hander must sit out the 2020 season to recover. Rodriguez is not alone in having heart damage from SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19. In a new study done in Germany, researchers studied the hearts of 100 patients who had recently recovered from COVID-19. The findings were alarming: 78 patients had heart abnormalities, as shown by a special kind of imaging test that shows the heart’s structure (a cardiac MRI), and 60 had myocarditis. These patients were mostly young and previously healthy . Several had just returned from ski trips. While other studies have shown a lower rate of heart problems—for example, a study of 416 patients hosp
Read more

New story in Health from Time: U.S. Inmates ‘Mistakenly’ Received COVID-19 Stimulus Checks. Now, the IRS Wants That Money Back

(BOISE, Idaho) — Hundreds of thousands of dollars in coronavirus relief payments have been sent to people incarcerated across the United States, and now the IRS is asking state officials to help claw back the cash that the federal tax agency says was mistakenly sent. The legislation authorizing the payments during the pandemic doesn’t specifically exclude jail or prison inmates, and the IRS has refused to say exactly what legal authority it has to retrieve the money. On its website, it points to the unrelated Social Security Act, which bars incarcerated people from receiving some types of old-age and survivor insurance benefit payments. “I can’t give you the legal basis. All I can tell you is this is the language the Treasury and ourselves have been using,” IRS spokesman Eric Smith said. “It’s just the same list as in the Social Security Act.” Read more: ‘A Double Whammy.’ Those Who Most Need The $1,200 Stimulus Checks May Wait the Longest To Get Them Tax attorney Kell
Read more