ABSTRACT
We report evaluation of 30 assays' (17 rapid tests (RDTs) and 13 automated/manual ELISA/CLIA assay (IAs)) clinical performances with 2594 sera collected from symptomatic patients with positive SARS-CoV-2 rRT-PCR on a respiratory sample, and 1996 pre-epidemic serum samples expected to be negative. Only 4 RDT and 3 IAs fitted both specificity (> 98%) and sensitivity (> 90%) criteria according to French recommendations. Serology may offer valuable information during COVID-19 pandemic, but inconsistent performances observed among the 30 commercial assays evaluated, which underlines the importance of independent evaluation before clinical implementation.
Subject(s)
Antibodies, Viral/blood , COVID-19 Serological Testing/methods , COVID-19/blood , Immunoassay/methods , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , COVID-19/virology , Humans , Immunoassay/economics , Immunoglobulin M/blood , Reagent Kits, Diagnostic , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Sensitivity and SpecificityABSTRACT
Facing the ongoing pandemic caused by SARS-CoV-2, there is an urgent need for serological assays identifying individuals previously infected by coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), including rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs). We herein compared five new CE-IVD-labeled commercially available SARS-CoV-2 whole-blood finger-stick IgG/IgM combined RDTs, in parallel according to the manufacturers' instructions, with two serum panels obtained from 48 patients with confirmed COVID-19 (panel I) and from a group of 52 patients randomly selected, for whom serum samples collected before the COVID-19 epidemic (from October 1 to November 30, 2019) were negative for SARS-CoV-2 IgG (panel II). We found a sensitivity of 95.8 %, 91.6 %, 92.3 %, 97.9 % and 91.4 %, and a specificity of 98.1 %, 86.5 %, 100 %, 98.1 % and 84.6 %, for BIOSYNEX COVID-19 BSS (IgG/IgM) (Biosynex Swiss SA, Freiburg, Switzerland), Humasis COVID-19 IgG/IgM Test (Humasis Co., Ltd., Gyneonggi, Republic of Korea), LYHER COVID-19 IgM/IgG Rapid Test (Medakit Ltd, Hong Kong, China), SIENNA™ COVID-19 (IgG/IgM) Rapid Test Cassette (Salofa Oy, Salo, Finland) and NG-BIOTECH COVID-19 (IgG/IgM) (NG-Biotech, Guipry, France), respectively. Commercially available SARS-CoV-2 IgG/IgM combined RDTs have a sufficient sensitivity for identifying individuals with past SARS-CoV-2 infection, but some RDTs may lack of specificity, with risk of false positivity mainly for the IgM band.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 Serological Testing , COVID-19/diagnosis , Immunoglobulin G/blood , Immunoglobulin M/blood , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Antibodies, Viral/blood , False Positive Reactions , Female , Humans , Immunoassay , Male , Middle Aged , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Sensitivity and Specificity , Time FactorsSubject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Hot Temperature , Nucleic Acid Amplification Techniques/methods , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis , RNA, Viral/analysis , Virus Inactivation , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/virology , Humans , Molecular Diagnostic Techniques/methods , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/virology , Reagent Kits, Diagnostic , SARS-CoV-2ABSTRACT
Facing the ongoing pandemic caused by SARS-CoV-2, there is an urgent need for serological assays identifying individuals with on-going infection as well as past coronavirus infectious disease 2019 (COVID-19). We herein evaluated the analytical performances of the CE IVD-labeled Abbott SARS-CoV-2 IgG assay (Des Plaines, IL, USA) carried out with the automated Abbott Architect™ i2000 platform at Hôpital Européen Georges Pompidou, Paris, France, using serum sample panels obtained from health-workers with COVID-19 history confirmed by positive nucleic acid amplification-based diagnosis and from patients randomly selected for whom serum samples were collected before the COVID-19 epidemic. The Abbott SARS-CoV-2 IgG assay showed sensitivity of 94 % and specificity of 100 %, demonstrating high analytical performances allowing convenient management of suspected on-going and past-infections. In addition, the SARS-CoV-2 IgG positivity rates were compared in COVID-19 positive and COVID-19 free areas from our hospital. Thus, the frequency of SARS-CoV-2-specific IgG was around 10-fold higher in COVID-19 areas than COVID-19 free areas (75 % versus 8%; P < 0.001). Interestingly, several inpatients hospitalized in COVID-19 free areas suffering from a wide range of unexplained clinical features including cardiac, vascular, renal, metabolic and infectious disorders, were unexpectedly found seropositive for SARS-CoV-2 IgG by systematic routine serology, suggesting possible causal involvement of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Taken together, these observations highlight the potential interest of SARS-CoV-2-specific serology in the context of COVID-19 epidemic, especially to assess past SARS-CoV-2 infection as well as possible unexpected COVID-19-associated disorders.