Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 5 de 5
Filter
1.
J Clin Pathol ; 2022 Aug 30.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2020140

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Serological tests are widely used in various medical disciplines for diagnostic and monitoring purposes. Unfortunately, the sensitivity and specificity of test systems are often poor, leaving room for false-positive and false-negative results. However, conventional methods were used to increase specificity and decrease sensitivity and vice versa. Using SARS-CoV-2 serology as an example, we propose here a novel testing strategy: the 'sensitivity improved two-test' or 'SIT²' algorithm. METHODS: SIT² involves confirmatory retesting of samples with results falling in a predefined retesting zone of an initial screening test, with adjusted cut-offs to increase sensitivity. We verified and compared the performance of SIT² to single tests and orthogonal testing (OTA) in an Austrian cohort (1117 negative, 64 post-COVID-positive samples) and validated the algorithm in an independent British cohort (976 negatives and 536 positives). RESULTS: The specificity of SIT² was superior to single tests and non-inferior to OTA. The sensitivity was maintained or even improved using SIT² when compared with single tests or OTA. SIT² allowed correct identification of infected individuals even when a live virus neutralisation assay could not detect antibodies. Compared with single testing or OTA, SIT² significantly reduced total test errors to 0.46% (0.24-0.65) or 1.60% (0.94-2.38) at both 5% or 20% seroprevalence. CONCLUSION: For SARS-CoV-2 serology, SIT² proved to be the best diagnostic choice at both 5% and 20% seroprevalence in all tested scenarios. It is an easy to apply algorithm and can potentially be helpful for the serology of other infectious diseases.

2.
Sci Rep ; 11(1): 10158, 2021 05 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1226443

ABSTRACT

We analyzed SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence in a large, well-described representative Viennese cohort after an early governmental lockdown with respect to the occurrence of symptoms and household transmission. Participants of the LEAD Study, a population-based cohort study from Vienna, Austria, were invited along with their household members (April 20th to May20th 2020). Sera were analyzed using anti-SARS-CoV-2 immunoassay including a neutralization test as a confirmatory assay. A total of 12,419 individuals participated (5984 LEAD participants; 6435 household members), 163 (1.31%; 59 LEAD cohort members) of whom were SARS-CoV-2 antibody positive. The estimated number of COVID-19 cases projected from our findings by age and sex for Vienna was 21,504 (1.13%). Cumulative number of positively tested cases in Vienna until May 20th 2020 was 3020, hence 7.1 times (95% confidence interval 5.5-9.1) lower than projected. Relative risk (RR) of seropositivity by age was highest for children aged 6-9 years [RR compared to age group 20-49: 1.21 (CI 0.37-4.01)], lowest for ≥ 65 years [RR 0.47 (CI 0.21-1.03)]. Half of the positive individuals developed no or mild symptoms. In a multivariate analysis, taste and smell disturbances were most strongly related to SARS-CoV-2 positivity. Infection probability within households with one confirmed SARS-CoV-2-specific antibody-positive person was 31%. Although seroprevalence was very low (1.13%) for a central European capital city, due to an early governmental lockdown, SARS-CoV-2 infections were more prevalent than officially reported polymerase chain reaction-positive cases. Of note, seroprevalence was highest in young children. Half of SARS-CoV-2 antibody-positive subjects had no or only mild symptoms. Taste and smell disturbances were most prominent, possibly guiding clinicians in diagnosing SARS-CoV-2 infection.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Austria/epidemiology , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Serological Testing , Child , Communicable Disease Control , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Prospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Seroepidemiologic Studies , Young Adult
3.
EBioMedicine ; 67: 103348, 2021 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1201238

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Antibody tests are essential tools to investigate humoral immunity following SARS-CoV-2 infection or vaccination. While first-generation antibody tests have primarily provided qualitative results, accurate seroprevalence studies and tracking of antibody levels over time require highly specific, sensitive and quantitative test setups. METHODS: We have developed two quantitative, easy-to-implement SARS-CoV-2 antibody tests, based on the spike receptor binding domain and the nucleocapsid protein. Comprehensive evaluation of antigens from several biotechnological platforms enabled the identification of superior antigen designs for reliable serodiagnostic. Cut-off modelling based on unprecedented large and heterogeneous multicentric validation cohorts allowed us to define optimal thresholds for the tests' broad applications in different aspects of clinical use, such as seroprevalence studies and convalescent plasma donor qualification. FINDINGS: Both developed serotests individually performed similarly-well as fully-automated CE-marked test systems. Our described sensitivity-improved orthogonal test approach assures highest specificity (99.8%); thereby enabling robust serodiagnosis in low-prevalence settings with simple test formats. The inclusion of a calibrator permits accurate quantitative monitoring of antibody concentrations in samples collected at different time points during the acute and convalescent phase of COVID-19 and disclosed antibody level thresholds that correlate well with robust neutralization of authentic SARS-CoV-2 virus. INTERPRETATION: We demonstrate that antigen source and purity strongly impact serotest performance. Comprehensive biotechnology-assisted selection of antigens and in-depth characterisation of the assays allowed us to overcome limitations of simple ELISA-based antibody test formats based on chromometric reporters, to yield comparable assay performance as fully-automated platforms. FUNDING: WWTF, Project No. COV20-016; BOKU, LBI/LBG.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Viral/blood , COVID-19 Serological Testing/methods , COVID-19/diagnosis , Coronavirus Nucleocapsid Proteins/immunology , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Spike Glycoprotein, Coronavirus/chemistry , Spike Glycoprotein, Coronavirus/immunology , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Animals , Binding Sites , CHO Cells , COVID-19/immunology , Cricetulus , Early Diagnosis , HEK293 Cells , Humans , Immunoglobulin G/blood , Middle Aged , Sensitivity and Specificity , Young Adult
4.
Clin Chem ; 66(11): 1405-1413, 2020 11 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-706670

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: In the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, numerous new serological test systems for the detection of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies rapidly have become available. However, the clinical performance of many of these is still insufficiently described. Therefore, we compared 3 commercial CE-marked, SARS-CoV-2 antibody assays side by side. METHODS: We included a total of 1154 specimens from pre-COVID-19 times and 65 samples from COVID-19 patients (≥14 days after symptom onset) to evaluate the test performance of SARS-CoV-2 serological assays by Abbott, Roche, and DiaSorin. RESULTS: All 3 assays presented with high specificities: 99.2% (98.6-99.7) for Abbott, 99.7% (99.2-100.0) for Roche, and 98.3% (97.3-98.9) for DiaSorin. In contrast to the manufacturers' specifications, sensitivities only ranged from 83.1% to 89.2%. Although the 3 methods were in good agreement (Cohen's Kappa 0.71-0.87), McNemar tests revealed significant differences between results obtained from Roche and DiaSorin. However, at low seroprevalences, the minor differences in specificity resulted in profound discrepancies of positive predictive values at 1% seroprevalence: 52.3% (36.2-67.9), 77.6% (52.8-91.5), and 32.6% (23.6-43.1) for Abbott, Roche, and DiaSorin, respectively. CONCLUSION: We found diagnostically relevant differences in specificities for the anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody assays by Abbott, Roche, and DiaSorin that have a significant impact on the positive predictive values of these tests.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus/immunology , Clinical Laboratory Techniques , Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis , Antibodies, Viral/blood , Automation, Laboratory , COVID-19 , COVID-19 Testing , Cross-Sectional Studies , False Positive Reactions , Humans , Immunoglobulin G/blood , Limit of Detection , Pandemics , Prospective Studies , ROC Curve , SARS-CoV-2 , Sensitivity and Specificity
5.
Eur Heart J Case Rep ; 4(FI1): 1-6, 2020 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-613432

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Fulminant cardiac involvement in COVID-19 patients has been reported; the underlying suspected mechanisms include myocarditis, arrhythmia, and cardiac tamponade. In parallel, atrial fibrillation is common in the elderly population which is at particularly high risk for COVID-19 morbidity and mortality. CASE SUMMARY: A 72-year-old male SARS-CoV2-positive patient was admitted to the intensive care unit due to delirium and acute respiratory failure. Atrial fibrillation known from history was exacerbated, and made complex rate and rhythm control necessary. Progressive heart failure with haemodynamic deterioration and acute kidney injury with the need for continuous renal replacement therapy were further aggravated by pericardial tamponade. DISCUSSION: Treatment of acute heart failure in COVID-19 patients with a cytokine storm complicated by tachycardic atrial fibrillation should include adequate rate or rhythm control, and potentially immunomodulation.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL