Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 5 de 5
Filter
2.
Front Mol Biosci ; 8: 682405, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1348519

ABSTRACT

The worldwide pandemic of COVID-19 has become a global public health crisis. Various clinical diagnosis methods have been developed to distinguish COVID-19-infected patients from healthy people. The nucleic acid test is the golden standard for virus detection as it is suitable for early diagnosis. However, due to the low amount of viral nucleic acid in the respiratory tract, the sensitivity of nucleic acid detection is unsatisfactory. As a result, serological screening began to be widely used with the merits of simple procedures, lower cost, and shorter detection time. Serological tests currently include the enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), lateral flow immunoassay (LFIA), and chemiluminescence immunoassay (CLIA). This review describes various serological methods, discusses the performance and diagnostic effects of different methods, and points out the problems and the direction of optimization, to improve the efficiency of clinical diagnosis. These increasingly sophisticated and diverse serological diagnostic technologies will help human beings to control the spread of COVID-19.

3.
ACS Sens ; 6(7): 2709-2719, 2021 07 23.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1310777

ABSTRACT

The spread of Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), resulting in a global pandemic with around four million deaths. Although there are a variety of nucleic acid-based tests for detecting SARS-CoV-2, these methods have a relatively high cost and require expensive supporting equipment. To overcome these limitations and improve the efficiency of SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis, we developed a microfluidic platform that collected serum by a pulling-force spinning top and paper-based microfluidic enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) for quantitative IgA/IgM/IgG measurements in an instrument-free way. We further validated the paper-based microfluidic ELISA analysis of SARS-CoV-2 receptor-binding domain (RBD)-specific IgA/IgM/IgG antibodies from human blood samples as a good measurement with higher sensitivity compared with traditional IgM/IgG detection (99.7% vs 95.6%) for early illness onset patients. In conclusion, we provide an alternative solution for the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 in a portable manner by this smart integration of pulling-force spinning top and paper-based microfluidic immunoassay.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Testing , COVID-19 , Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay , Lab-On-A-Chip Devices , Antibodies, Viral/blood , COVID-19/diagnosis , Humans , SARS-CoV-2 , Sensitivity and Specificity
4.
The Cryosphere ; 15(7):3083-3099, 2021.
Article in English | ProQuest Central | ID: covidwho-1298214

ABSTRACT

We present the results of an assessment of ice surface elevation measurements from NASA's Ice, Cloud, and land Elevation Satellite-2 (ICESat-2) along the CHINARE (CHINese Antarctic Research Expedition) route near the Amery Ice Shelf in East Antarctica. The validation campaign was designed and implemented in cooperation with the 36th CHINARE Antarctic expedition from December 2019 to February 2020. The assessment of the ICESat-2 geolocated photon product (ATL03) and land ice elevation product (ATL06) was performed based on coordinated multi-sensor observations using two roof-mounted kinematic global navigation satellite system (GNSS) receivers, two line arrays of corner cube retroreflectors (CCRs), two sets of retroreflective target sheets (RTSs), and two unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) with cameras. This systematic validation of the ICESat-2 data covered a variety of Antarctic ice surface conditions along the 520 km traverse from the coastal Zhongshan Station to the inland Taishan Station. This comprehensive investigation is complementary to the 750 km traverse validation of flat inland Antarctica containing a 300 km latitude traverse of 88∘ S by the mission team (Brunt et al., 2021). Overall, the validation results show that the elevation of the ATL06 ice surface points is accurate to 1.5 cm with a precision of 9.1 cm along the 520 km CHINARE route. The elevation of the ATL03 photons has an offset of 2.1 cm from a GNSS-surveyed CCR and is accurate to 2.5 cm with a precision of 2.7 cm as estimated by using RTSs. The validation results demonstrate that the estimated ICESat-2 elevations are accurate to 1.5–2.5 cm in this East Antarctic region, which shows the potential of the data products for eliminating mission biases by overcoming the uncertainties in the estimation of mass balance in East Antarctica. It should be emphasized that the results based on the CCR and RTS techniques can be improved by further aggregation of observation opportunities for a more robust assessment. The developed validation methodology and sensor system can be applied for continuous assessment of ICESat-2 data, especially for calibration against potential degradation of the elevation measurements during the later operation period.

5.
Rev Med Virol ; 31(3): e2181, 2021 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-909129

ABSTRACT

This study aimed to assess the diagnostic test accuracy (DTA) of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-COV-2) serological test methods and the kinetics of antibody positivity. Systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guideline. We included articles evaluating the diagnostic accuracy of serological tests and the kinetics of antibody positivity. MEDLINE through PubMed, Scopus, medRxiv and bioRxiv were sources of articles. Methodological qualities of included articles were appraised using QUADAS-2 while Metandi performs bivariate meta-analysis of DTA using a generalized linear mixed-model approach. Stata 14 and Review Manager 5.3 were used for data analysis. The summary sensitivity/specificity of chemiluminescence immunoassay (CLIA), enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) and lateral flow immunoassay (LFIA) were 92% (95% CI: 86%-95%)/99% (CI: 97%-99%), 86% (CI: 82%-89%)/99% (CI: 98%-100%) and 78% (CI: 71%-83%)/98% (95% CI: 96%-99%), respectively. Moreover, CLIA-based assays produced nearly 100% sensitivity within 11-15 days post-symptom onset (DPSO). Based on antibody type, the sensitivity of ELISA-total antibody, CLIA-IgM/G and CLIA-IgG gauged at 94%, 92% and 92%, respectively. The sensitivity of CLIA-RBD assay reached 96%, while LFIA-S demonstrated the lowest sensitivity, 71% (95% CI: 58%-80%). CLIA assays targeting antibodies against RBD considered the best DTA. The antibody positivity rate increased corresponding with DPSO, but there was some decrement when moving from acute phase to convalescent phase of infection. As immunoglobulin isotope-related DTA was heterogeneous, our data have insufficient evidence to recommend CLIA/ELISA for clinical decision-making, but likely to have comparative advantage over RT-qPCR in certain circumstances and geographic regions.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Serological Testing/standards , COVID-19/diagnosis , Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay/standards , Flow Cytometry/standards , Luminescent Measurements/standards , SARS-CoV-2/pathogenicity , Antibodies, Viral/blood , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/immunology , COVID-19/virology , COVID-19 Serological Testing/methods , Convalescence , Humans , Immunoglobulin G/blood , Immunoglobulin M/blood , RNA, Viral/genetics , Reverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction/standards , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Sensitivity and Specificity , Severity of Illness Index
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL