ABSTRACT
ABSTRACT Amniotic fluid DNA samples were genotyped by multilocus-nested-PCR-RFLP, but only three of 11 markers amplified 113 of 122 (92.6%) samples, resulting in 12 untyped and 101 partial non-archetypal genotypes. The 101 typed samples were subdivided into four groups: G1 with 73 samples (5'and 3' SAG2 allele I + SAG3 allele III + GRA6 allele III), 53 had parasite load ≤ 102 parasites/mL (43 asymptomatic, 10 mild infections), 17 had load > 102 and ≤ 103 (one mild, 13 moderate and three severe), and three had load > 103 parasites/mL (three severe); G2 with 22 samples (5'and 3' SAG2 allele I + SAG3 allele III), all parasite load levels ≤ 102 parasites/mL (18 asymptomatic and four mild); G3 with five samples (5' and 3' SAG2 allele I + SAG3 allele II), parasite load ≤ 102 parasites/mL (three asymptomatic and two mild); G4 with one sample (5' and 3' SAG2 allele II + SAG3 allele II + GRA6 allele I), a parasite load < 102 parasites/mL in an asymptomatic infant. After DNA sequencing, restriction sites confirmed SAG2, SAG3 and GRA6 alleles in 98.7%, 100% and 100% of the cases, respectively, while single nucleotide polymorphisms confirmed 90% of 5'-SAG2 allele I; 98.7% of 3'-SAG2 allele I; 98% of SAG-3 allele III, but only 40% of GRA6 allele III results. For the moment, partial non-archetypal genotypes of parasites did not show any relationship with either parasite load in amniotic fluid samples or clinical outcome of infants at the age of 12 months.
ABSTRACT
ABSTRACT This study assessed the technical performance of a rapid lateral flow immunochromatographic assay (LFIA) for the detection of anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG and compared LFIA results with chemiluminescent immunoassay (CLIA) results and an in-house enzyme immunoassay (EIA). To this end, a total of 216 whole blood or serum samples from three groups were analyzed: the first group was composed of 68 true negative cases corresponding to blood bank donors, healthy young volunteers, and eight pediatric patients diagnosed with other coronavirus infections. The serum samples from these participants were obtained and stored in a pre-COVID-19 period, thus they were not expected to have COVID-19. In the second group of true positive cases, we chose to replace natural cases of COVID-19 by 96 participants who were expected to have produced anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies 30-60 days after the vaccine booster dose. The serum samples were collected on the same day that LFIA were tested either by EIA or CLIA. The third study group was composed of 52 participants (12 adults and 40 children) who did or did not have anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies due to specific clinical scenarios. The 12 adults had been vaccinated more than seven months before LFIA testing, and the 40 children had non-severe COVID-19 diagnosed using RT-PCR during the acute phase of infection. They were referred for outpatient follow-up and during this period the serum samples were collected and tested by CLIA and LFIA. All tests were performed by the same healthcare operator and there was no variation of LFIA results when tests were performed on finger prick whole blood or serum samples, so that results were grouped for analysis. LFIA's sensitivity in detecting anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies was 90%, specificity 97.6%, efficiency 93%, PPV 98.3%, NPV 86.6%, and likelihood ratio for a positive or a negative result were 37.5 and 0.01 respectively. There was a good agreement (Kappa index of 0.677) between LFIA results and serological (EIA or CLIA) results. In conclusion, LFIA analyzed in this study showed a good technical performance and agreement with reference serological assays (EIA or CLIA), therefore it can be recommended for use in the outpatient follow-up of non-severe cases of COVID-19 and to assess anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibody production induced by vaccination and the antibodies decrease over time. However, LFIAs should be confirmed by using reference serological assays whenever possible.