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

COVID-19 Surveillance Screening Program Used in Chicago School Systems Comes Under Scrutiny by Illinois Department of Public Health Following New York Times Article

Dozens of Chicago-area schools were reopened with the help of an $11 COVID-19 saliva test, but the qualifications of the clinical laboratory, and whether it complied with federal regulations, were called into question

It was only a matter of time when newly-formed clinical laboratories—taking advantage of the federal government’s loosening of regulations to promote COVID-19 testing—drew the attention of state regulators and the national news media. This is what happened at New Trier High School in Winnetka, Ill.

In March, the New York Times published an article, titled, “Why Virus Tests at One Elite School Ran Afoul of Regulators.” The article highlighted the coronavirus screening program implemented at New Trier High School and suggested that “New Trier may have inadvertently violated federal regulations on testing,” adding that “the Illinois Department of Public Health (IDPH) opened an investigation into the lab.”

SafeGuard Surveillance of Brookfield, Ill., was contracted to perform the routine saliva-based testing. SafeGuard analyzed saliva samples from students, teachers, and school staff to detect the presence of the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus. New Trier was just one of several school districts that contracted with SafeGuard for the testing, which costs $11 per test. The samples were typically processed the same day.

“This has been a really valuable safety mitigation for our district to make our staff, students, and community feel safer,” Chris McClain, Assistant Superintendent for Finance and Operations at Glenbard High School District 87, told the Chicago Tribune. “We’ve been very pleased with the program.” Glenbard also contracted with SafeGuard for the COVID-19 surveillance screening.

COVID-19 Surveillance or Screening?

Though the surveillance screening testing was working as intended for multiple Chicago areas school systems, the New York Times article called into question whether SafeGuard—which at the time lacked CLIA (Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments) certification—was qualified to conduct COVID-19 screening testing.

The article also alleged that SafeGuard was led by a scientist who was not qualified under the federal guidelines to run a diagnostic laboratory, and that the saliva test being used was not authorized for COVID-19 testing by the federal Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

It came down to whether SafeGuard was conducting “surveillance” testing, which does not require CLIA-certification, or “screening” which does.

SafeGuard was founded by Edward Campbell, PhD, Assistant Professor in the Department of Microbiology and Immunology at Loyola University in Chicago. Campbell, a virologist with decades of experience developing tests for HIV, “adapted a saliva-based coronavirus test last summer and first established a [COVID-19] lab for the suburban school district where he serves on the board,” Patch News reported.

Microbiologist-Edward-M.-Campbell,PhD-founder-SafeGuard-Surveillance-in-white-lab-coat
Microbiologist Edward M. Campbell, PhD (above), founded SafeGuard Surveillance toward the end of 2020 after demand for COVID-19 screening he had been conducting for various local school systems increased dramatically. In January, the startup clinical laboratory was running about 25,000 tests per week, the Riverside/Brookfield Landmark reported. (Photo copyright: Loyola University.)

SafeGuard Claims It Complied with Federal Regulations

SafeGuard’s COVID-19 screening tool utilizes RT-LAMP (reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification) to look for the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus in saliva samples. This test is less sensitive than the more commonly used polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test that uses a nasal swab to detect the virus. However, the RT-LAMP test is considered reliable, particularly in individuals with a high viral load. The RT-LAMP test also is less expensive than the PCR test, which makes it appealing for public school systems. 

To use the RT-LAMP test, faculty, staff, and students spit into test tubes at home and then take the sample to their school or other drop-off location. Campbell’s lab then processes the samples.

After the New York Times article came out, both New Trier and SafeGuard denied they had done anything wrong, and that their screening program complied with government regulations for COVID-19 testing. Campbell maintained that he did not need the CLIA certification to operate his lab for testing and that SafeGuard complied with all federal regulations. Nevertheless, in March, SafeGuard applied for and received CLIA-certification to “conduct ‘screening’ testing, instead of just ‘surveillance’ testing,” Patch News reported.

“We’re doing everything we can to operate in good faith under the guidance that clearly exists,” Campbell told The Chicago Tribune.

In a statement, New Trier district officials said, “New Trier has also met with local and state health authorities to review our use of the program and they have not directed us to change our use of it. From the time the program began, New Trier has been clear that the saliva program is non-diagnostic and must be confirmed by a lab test. To suggest otherwise is false,” Patch News reported.

Surveillance Testing versus Screening

In August, the federal Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), which oversees CLIA labs, released guidelines that stated COVID-19 testing could be performed in clinical laboratories that were not CLIA-certified so long as patient-specific results are not reported.

This “surveillance testing” is intended to identify the disease within a population group and not diagnose individuals. If a person tests positive for COVID-19 via SafeGuard’s saliva test, the individual is directed to get an FDA-approved test to confirm the diagnosis.

“We do definitely see the value of surveillance testing and how that can be used to help schools make informed decisions about remote, in-person, or hybrid learning,” Melaney Arnold, State Public Information Officer for the Illinois Department of Public Health (IDPH) told the Chicago Tribune. She added that the IDPH wants to provide schools with the tools they need to navigate the pandemic.

Following the New York Times article about New Trier High School and SafeGuard’s COVID-19 screening program, the Illinois Department of Public Health opened an investigation into the company. However, the investigation has ended, and the state agency is not taking any further action against SafeGuard, Patch News reported.

It’s worth noting that it was the FDA’s relaxing of federal regulations that encouraged the development of startup clinical laboratories like SafeGuard in the first place. There is, apparently, a fine line between surveillance and screening, and clinical laboratories engaged in one or the other should confirm they have the required certifications.

—JP Schlingman

Related Information:

Why Virus Tests at One Elite School Ran Afoul of Regulators

An $11 Saliva Test for COVID-19 Helped Dozens of Chicago-area Schools Reopen. So Why Are Administrators Scrambling to Defend it Now?

When COVID Came Calling, Brookfield School Official Acted

Safeguard Saliva Testing Program Certified After State Scrutiny

University of Pennsylvania Researchers Develop $2 Zika Proof-of-Concept Test That Needs Neither Electricity Nor a Clinical Laboratory to Return Accurate Results

Using 3D printing and a chemical heat source, University of Pennsylvania researchers have created a proof-of-concept for an affordable Zika test that returns results in just 40 minutes

There’s a gap in Zika virus testing that researchers at the University of Pennsylvania hope to fill. That gap is a point-of-care test for the Zika virus that can produce a fast and accurate result, whether in developed nations or in developing countries that don’t have many state-of-the art clinical laboratories.

Although numerous Zika virus tests have earned Emergency Use Authorizations from the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), gold standard detection is still limited to medical laboratories. To date, the FDA’s list of current and terminated Emergency Use Authorizations include no point-of-care options to help medical professionals quickly screen patients for Zika infection.

As noted by the Center for Disease Control and Prevention’s “Interim Guidance for Interpretation of Zika Antibody Test Results,” the antibodies that indicate Zika virus activity also share similarities with other flavivirus viruses. Of particular note is similarities with Dengue virus—a virus prevalent in many of the areas in which Zika is found. (more…)

;