News, Analysis, Trends, Management Innovations for
Clinical Laboratories and Pathology Groups

Hosted by Robert Michel

News, Analysis, Trends, Management Innovations for
Clinical Laboratories and Pathology Groups

Hosted by Robert Michel
Sign In

Will Blowing in a Device Be Useful in Screening for COVID-19? FDA Grants Its First EUA for a Breathalyzer SARS-CoV-2 Screening Test

InspectIR COVID-19 Breathalyzer identifies a chemical signature associated with SARS-CoV-2 in about three minutes with 91.2% sensitivity and 99.3% specificity

One company is hoping that it can make breathalyzers a viable, easier way to screen for SARS-CoV-2. It will soon have the opportunity to learn if consumers will accept this form of screening for COVID-19, as its device recently obtained an Emergency Use Authorization from the FDA.

On April 14, 2022, InspectIR Systems, LLC, of Frisco, Texas, was granted the US Food and Drug Administration’s first-ever emergency use authorization (EUA202006) for a portable breath test device designed to screen for SARS-CoV-2 infection. Clinical laboratories that perform COVID-19 testing will want to compare the high-level sensitivity of this breath test compared to rapid antigen tests currently used for COVID-19 screening.

The InspectIR COVID-19 Breathalyzer uses gas chromatography-mass spectrometry to identify mixtures of five volatile organic compounds (VOCs) uniquely associated with the disease, the FDA said in a news release announcing the EUA.

The device is about the size of a carry-on suitcase. It provides test results in less than three minutes and is currently authorized for use with subjects who are 18 or older.

The FDA’s EUA limits use of the device to “a qualified, trained operator under the supervision of a healthcare provider licensed or authorized by state law to prescribe tests,” the federal agency said. The test “can be performed in environments where the patient specimen is both collected and analyzed, such as doctor’s offices, hospitals, and mobile testing sites.”

Jeffrey Shuren, MD, JD
The InspectIR COVID-19 Breathalyzer device “is yet another example of the rapid innovation occurring with diagnostic tests for COVID-19,” said Jeffrey Shuren, MD, JD (above), director of the FDA’s Center for Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH), in the news release. A portable device that can identify SARS-CoV-2 infections in a few minutes with 91% specificity may be of great interest to clinical laboratory companies operating COVID-19 popup testing sites around the nation. (Photo copyright: US Food and Drug Administration.)

In granting the authorization, the FDA cited results of a study with 2,409 participants in which the test had sensitivity (correct positive results) of 91.2% and specificity (correct negative results) of 99.3%. “The test performed with similar sensitivity in a follow-up clinical study focused on the Omicron variant,” the agency stated.

“The FDA continues to support the development of novel COVID-19 tests with the goal of advancing technologies that can help address the current pandemic and better position the US for the next public health emergency,” said Jeffrey Shuren, MD, JD, director of the FDA’s Center for Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH), in the news release.

In its coverage of the EUA, CNET noted that the InspectIR breath test is more sensitive than rapid antigen tests but not as sensitive as PCR tests. The FDA advised that people who receive a positive test result with the InspectIR COVID-19 Breathalyzer should follow up with a PCR molecular test.

How the InspectIR COVID-19 Breathalyzer Works

InspectIR LLC was founded in 2017 by Tim Wing and John Redmond, Forbes reported. Their original goal was to develop a breathalyzer for detection of cannabis or opioid use. However, with the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, the entrepreneurs decided to adapt the technology into a SARS-CoV-2 diagnostic test.

Lacking a background in chemistry, they turned to Guido Verbeck, PhD, head of the University of North Texas Laboratory of Imaging Mass Spectrometry (UNT-LIMS) in Denton, Texas, to help develop the breath test.

As described in the FDA’s EUA documents, a subject breathes into the device using a sterilized one-time-use straw. A pre-concentrator collects and concentrates the five targeted VOCs, all from the ketone and aldehyde families of organic compounds. These go to a Residual Gas Analyzer, and an algorithm determines whether the sample contains the chemical signature associated with a SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Redmond told Forbes that the specific mix of VOCs is proprietary. The article notes that Wing, Redmond, and Verbeck have patented the pre-concentrator technology.

The devices are manufactured at a Pfeiffer Vacuum Inc. facility in Indiana. The InspectIR founders told Forbes they expect to produce 100 units per week in a start-up phase with plans to ramp up as sales increase. They also plan to look at applications for other respiratory diseases.

InspectIR has not announced exact pricing, but Time reports that the company will lease the equipment to clients, and that pricing per test will be comparable to rapid antigen tests.

InspectIR’s first breathalyzer device is receiving much positive coverage from the media. Should it prove to effective at spotting COVID-19 at popup testing sites, it may supplant traditional clinical laboratory rapid antigen tests as the screening test of choice.   

Stephen Beale

Related Information:

Coronavirus (COVID-19) Update: FDA Authorizes First COVID-19 Diagnostic Test Using Breath Samples

The First COVID-19 Breathalyzer Test Is Coming to the US

Frisco Startup Gets FDA Approval on COVID Breathalyzer after Teaming Up with UNT Researcher

Meet the Founders of the $2.7 Million Startup Behind the New COVID Breathalyzer

FDA Authorizes First COVID-19 Breath Test

How a New Breath Test Could Make Mass COVID Testing Easier

FDA Authorizes First COVID-19 Breath Test Meet the InspectIR COVID-19 Breathalyzer Test Just Authorized by the FDA

FDA Authorizes First At-Home COVID-19 Antigen Tests, but Roadblocks Remain for “Fast-and-Frequent” Antigen Testing

Developers of medical laboratory tests had high hopes that cheap saliva-based tests would compete with at-home OTC tests that use nasal swabs, but skepticism among scientists continues

Reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) technology has become the standard for clinical laboratory diagnostic testing used to detect the presence of the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus. However, to enable more widespread testing, some public health experts have called for deployment of cheap, rapid, saliva-based antigen tests that could be self-administered by consumers in their homes.

Despite the technology’s lower sensitivity compared with RT-PCR testing, the idea of “fast-and-frequent” universal antigen testing has gained support as a possible game-changer against the outbreak, the New York Times reported.

The FDA recently took a step in this direction with its first emergency use authorization for the Ellume COVID-19 at-home antigen test. But other developments suggest that these tests may fall short of the lofty vision initially outlined by the experts.

Ellume’s COVID-19 Home Test
Ellume’s COVID-19 Home Test (above) received emergency use authorization from the FDA on December 15. In a press release, Ellume claimed its rapid-antigen test, “demonstrated a sensitivity of 96% and specificity of 100%, and in asymptomatic individuals, the test demonstrated a sensitivity of 91% and specificity of 96%. This level of accuracy across both symptomatic and asymptomatic individuals is crucial in mitigating the spread of an infectious disease like COVID-19.” (Photo copyright: Ellume.)

The Promise of Rapid Antigen COVID-19 Tests

In a column he wrote for Time in July, Ashish K. Jha, MD, MPH, a practicing General Internist and Dean of the Brown University School of Public Health, described the promise of rapid antigen tests. “Imagine spitting on a special strip of paper every morning and being told two minutes later whether you were positive for COVID-19,” he wrote. “If everyone in the United States did this daily, we would dramatically drop our transmission rates and bring the pandemic under control.”

Another advocate for this approach is Michael Mina, MD, PhD, an assistant professor of epidemiology at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health and a core member of the School’s Center for Communicable Disease Dynamics (CCDD). In a commentary for Time in November he wrote, “Widespread and frequent rapid antigen testing (public health screening to suppress outbreaks) is the best possible tool we have at our disposal today—and we are not using it.”

However, one major issue with antigen testing is sensitivity. “Antigen tests require higher levels of virus than qPCR [quantitative polymerase chain reaction] to return a positive result,” Jha wrote in Time. However, he contends, “the frequency of testing and the speed of results” counter concerns about accuracy.

Even with lower sensitivity, Jha wrote, the quicker test results from antigen tests “would identify viral loads during the most infectious period, meaning those cases we care most about identifying—at the peak period of infectiousness—are less likely to be missed.”

As the FDA explains, RT-PCR molecular tests “detect the virus’ genetic material,” whereas, according to an article published in Nature, titled, “Fast Coronavirus Tests: What They Can and Can’t Do,” antigen tests can “detect specific proteins … on the surface of the virus, and can identify people who are at the peak of infection, when virus levels in the body are likely to be high.”

At-Home Antigen Tests Receive EUAs

The new antigen test developed by Ellume is “the first over-the-counter (OTC) fully at-home diagnostic test for COVID-19,” the FDA said in a press release. The user self-administers a nasal swab and places it in an analyzer connected to a smartphone app. It can deliver results in 20 minutes. The company states that its test has overall sensitivity of 95% and specificity of 97% based on a clinical study of 198 subjects in a simulated home setting.

Jeffrey Shuren, MD, JD, Director of FDA’s Center for Devices and Radiological Health, said in the FDA press release, “This test, like other antigen tests, is less sensitive and less specific than typical molecular tests run in a lab. However, the fact that it can be used completely at home and return results quickly means that it can play an important role in response to the pandemic.”

Ellume expects to deliver about 20 million tests to the US by the end of June 2021. Multiple outlets reported that the test will cost about $30, AP News reported.

Meanwhile, the FDA also authorized at-home use of Abbott’s BinaxNOW rapid antigen test, which was previously authorized for use in point-of-care settings. This test, which requires a prescription, will sell for $25.

In a series of tweets, Harvard’s Mina applauded both moves, but he wrote that they [antigen tests] still fall short of his vision for fast and frequent testing. He described Abbott’s BinaxNOW as “the type of rapid test I have been calling for,” but said he’d like to see tests priced far less and available without a prescription.

Diminishing Prospects for Saliva-based Antigen Tests?

All rapid antigen tests authorized by the FDA so far require nasopharyngeal and/or nasal swab specimens, and it appears that it may be a long time, if ever, before saliva-based antigen tests are available. The New York Times (NYT) reported in October that two companies working on antigen tests—E25Bio and OraSure (NASDAQ:OSUR)—have dropped plans to enable use of saliva.

E25Bio founder Bobby Brooke Herrera, PhD with E25Bio co-founder and Chief Technology Officer Irene Bosch
“If I was placing a bet—which I am, because I’m leading an antigen-based testing company—I would say it’s going to be very difficult for antigen-based testing to work on saliva samples,” E25Bio founder Bobby Brooke Herrera, PhD (above with E25Bio co-founder and Chief Technology Officer Irene Bosch) told the NYT. (Photo copyright: WCVB-TV.)

One advantage of a saliva-based test is that it would be easier to self-administer. “But as they continued to tinker with their tests, researchers at both E25Bio and OraSure found saliva’s performance to be more lackluster than anticipated, and were forced to pivot,” the New York Times reported. Instead, both companies will seek authorization for use of their tests with nasal swabs.

HHS Contract for Antigen Tests Brings High Rates of False Positives

A recent investigative story in ProPublica, titled, “Rapid Testing Is Less Accurate than the Government Wants to Admit,” raised additional questions about rapid antigen testing. In August, the US Department of Health and Human Services announced it had awarded a $760 million contract for 150 million Abbott BinaxNOW tests to be distributed to schools and nursing homes. But later, according to ProPublica, healthcare workers in Nevada and Vermont reported high rates of false positives.

“With the benefit of hindsight, experts said the Trump administration should have released antigen tests primarily to communities with outbreaks instead of expecting them to work just as well in large groups of asymptomatic people,” ProPublica reported. “Understanding they can produce false results; the government could have ensured that clinics had enough for repeat testing to reduce false negatives and access to more precise PCR tests to weed out false positives.”

A few weeks after the reports from Nevada and Vermont, the FDA issued a letter advising clinical laboratories and healthcare providers about the possibility of false positives, along with steps they could take to improve accuracy.

Though some experts remain hopeful about “fast-and-frequent” testing, others are skeptical and say more research is needed to assess the value of this approach. “We are open to thinking outside the box and coming up with new ways to handle this pandemic,” Esther Babady PhD, D(ABMM) of Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, told the New York Times. However, she added, “the data for that is what’s missing.”

Nevertheless, were at-home rapid saliva-based antigen tests to become a common choice for healthcare consumers, clinical laboratories that perform RT-PCR testing for COVID-19 could see a marked decrease in orders. Thus, regardless of the current state of antigen testing, its development is worth watching.

—Stephen Beale

Related Information:

How We Can Stop the Spread of COVID-19 by Christmas

Over-the-Counter Home Test for COVID-19 Gets US Green Light

‘A Major Breakthrough’: FDA Authorizes Nation’s First At-Home, Over-the-Counter COVID-19 Test

FDA Authorizes First Rapid, Over-the-Counter Home Coronavirus Test

Rapid Testing Is Less Accurate than the Government Wants to Admit

Daily Coronavirus Testing at Home? Many Experts Are Skeptical

Home Tests Could Help in the Fight Against the Coronavirus. So Where Are They?

Screening to Prevent SARS-CoV-2 Outbreaks: Saliva-Based Antigen Testing Is Better than the PCR Swab

America Needs to Radically Rethink Our COVID-19 Testing Approach

Test Sensitivity Is Secondary to Frequency and Turnaround Time for COVID-19 Surveillance

Abbott COVID-19 Tests at Center of Squabble Between Trump Administration, States

Millions of Rapid COVID-19 Antigen Tests May Help Fill the Testing Gap

;