Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 12 de 12
Filter
1.
2021.
Preprint in English | Other preprints | ID: ppcovidwho-295726

ABSTRACT

Background Rapid antigen lateral flow devices (LFDs) are set to become a cornerstone of SARS-CoV-2 mass community testing. However, their reduced sensitivity compared to PCR has raised questions of how well they identify infectious cases. Understanding their capabilities and limitations is therefore essential for successful implementation. To address this, we evaluated six commercial LFDs on the same collection of clinical samples and assessed their correlation with infectious virus culture and cycle threshold (Ct) values. Methods A head-to-head comparison of specificities and sensitivities was performed on six commercial rapid antigen tests using combined nasal/oropharyngeal swabs, and their limits of detection determined using viral plaque forming units (PFU). Three of the LFDs were selected for a further study, correlating antigen test result with RT-PCR Ct values and positive viral culture in Vero-E6 cells. This included sequential swabs and matched serum samples obtained from four infected individuals with varying disease severities. Detection of antibodies was performed using an IgG/IgM Rapid Test Cassette, and neutralising antibodies by infectious virus assay. Finally, the sensitivities of selected rapid antigen LFTs were assessed in swabs with confirmed B.1.1.7 variant, currently the dominant genotype in the UK. Findings Most of the rapid antigen LFDs showed a high specificity (>98%), and accurately detected 50 PFU/test (equivalent N1 Ct of 23.7 or RNA copy number of 3×10 6 /ml). Sensitivities of the LFDs performed on clinical samples ranged from 65 to 89%. These sensitivities increased in most tests to over 90% for samples with Cts lower than 25. Positive virus culture was achieved for 57 out of 141 samples, with 80% of the positive cultures from swabs with Cts lower than 23. Importantly, sensitivity of the LFDs increased to over 95% when compared with the detection of infectious virus alone, irrespective of Ct. Longitudinal studies of PCR-positive samples showed that most of the tests identified all infectious samples as positive, but differences in test sensitivities can lead to missed cases in the absence of repeated testing. Finally, test performance was not impacted when re-assessed against swabs positive for the dominant UK variant B.1.1.7. Interpretation In this comprehensive comparison of antigen LFD and virus infectivity, we demonstrate a clear relationship between Ct values, quantitative culture of infectious virus and antigen LFD positivity in clinical samples. Our data support regular testing of target groups using LFDs to supplement the current PCR testing capacity, to rapidly identify infected individuals in situations where they would otherwise go undetected. Funding King’s Together Rapid COVID-19, Medical Research Council, Wellcome Trust, Huo Family Foundation.

2.
2021.
Preprint in English | Other preprints | ID: ppcovidwho-295185

ABSTRACT

Containing the global SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has been an unprecedented challenge due to high horizontal transmissivity and asymptomatic carriage rates. Lateral Flow Device (LFD) immunoassays were introduced in late 2020 to detect SARS-CoV-2 infection in asymptomatic or pre-symptomatic individuals rapidly. Whilst LFD technologies have been used for over 60 years, their widespread use as a public health tool during a pandemic is unprecedented. By the end of 2020, data from studies into the efficacy of the LFDs emerged and showed these point-of-care devices to have very high specificity (ability to identify true negatives) but inadequate sensitivity with high false-negative rates. The low sensitivity (<50%) shown in several studies is a critical public health concern, as asymptomatic or pre-symptomatic carriers may wrongly be assumed to be non-infectious, posing a significant risk of further spread in the community. Here we show that the direct visual readout of SARS-CoV-2 LFDs is an inadequate approach to discriminate a potentially infective viral concentration in a bio-sample. We quantified significant immobilized antigen-antibody-label conjugate complexes within the LFDs visually scored as negative using high-sensitivity synchrotron X-ray fluorescence imaging. Correlating quantitative X-ray fluorescence measurements and qRT-PCR determined numbers of viral copies, we identified that negatively scored samples could contain up to 100 PFU (equivalent here to ∼10,000 RNA copies/test). The study demonstrates where the shortcomings arise in many of the current direct-readout SARS-CoV-2 LFDs, namely being a deficiency in the readout as opposed to the potential level of detection of the test, which is orders of magnitude higher. The present findings are of importance, both to public health monitoring during the COVID-19 pandemic and to the rapid refinement of these tools for immediate and future applications.

3.
Nat Microbiol ; 6(11): 1433-1442, 2021 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1469971

ABSTRACT

COVID-19 vaccine design and vaccination rollout need to take into account a detailed understanding of antibody durability and cross-neutralizing potential against SARS-CoV-2 and emerging variants of concern (VOCs). Analyses of convalescent sera provide unique insights into antibody longevity and cross-neutralizing activity induced by variant spike proteins, which are putative vaccine candidates. Using sera from 38 individuals infected in wave 1, we show that cross-neutralizing activity can be detected up to 305 days pos onset of symptoms, although sera were less potent against B.1.1.7 (Alpha) and B1.351 (Beta). Over time, despite a reduction in overall neutralization activity, differences in sera neutralization potency against SARS-CoV-2 and the Alpha and Beta variants decreased, which suggests that continued antibody maturation improves tolerance to spike mutations. We also compared the cross-neutralizing activity of wave 1 sera with sera from individuals infected with the Alpha, the Beta or the B.1.617.2 (Delta) variants up to 79 days post onset of symptoms. While these sera neutralize the infecting VOC and parental virus to similar levels, cross-neutralization of different SARS-CoV-2 VOC lineages is reduced. These findings will inform the optimization of vaccines to protect against SARS-CoV-2 variants.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Neutralizing/blood , Antibodies, Neutralizing/immunology , Antibodies, Viral/blood , COVID-19/immunology , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Antibodies, Viral/immunology , COVID-19/therapy , COVID-19/virology , COVID-19 Vaccines , Female , Humans , Immunization, Passive , Immunoglobulin G , Immunoglobulin M , Male , Middle Aged , Mutation , Neutralization Tests , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , Spike Glycoprotein, Coronavirus/genetics , Vaccination , Young Adult
4.
PLoS One ; 16(9): e0256813, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1410652

ABSTRACT

There is a worldwide need for reagents to perform SARS-CoV-2 detection. Some laboratories have implemented kit-free protocols, but many others do not have the capacity to develop these and/or perform manual processing. We provide multiple workflows for SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid detection in clinical samples by comparing several commercially available RNA extraction methods: QIAamp Viral RNA Mini Kit (QIAgen), RNAdvance Blood/Viral (Beckman) and Mag-Bind Viral DNA/RNA 96 Kit (Omega Bio-tek). We also compared One-step RT-qPCR reagents: TaqMan Fast Virus 1-Step Master Mix (FastVirus, ThermoFisher Scientific), qPCRBIO Probe 1-Step Go Lo-ROX (PCR Biosystems) and Luna® Universal Probe One-Step RT-qPCR Kit (Luna, NEB). We used primer-probes that detect viral N (EUA CDC) and RdRP. RNA extraction methods provided similar results, with Beckman performing better with our primer-probe combinations. Luna proved most sensitive although overall the three reagents did not show significant differences. N detection was more reliable than that of RdRP, particularly in samples with low viral titres. Importantly, we demonstrated that heat treatment of nasopharyngeal swabs at 70°C for 10 or 30 min, or 90°C for 10 or 30 min (both original variant and B 1.1.7) inactivated SARS-CoV-2 employing plaque assays, and had minimal impact on the sensitivity of the qPCR in clinical samples. These findings make SARS-CoV-2 testing portable in settings that do not have CL-3 facilities. In summary, we provide several testing pipelines that can be easily implemented in other laboratories and have made all our protocols and SOPs freely available at https://osf.io/uebvj/.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Testing/methods , COVID-19/diagnosis , Hot Temperature , RNA, Viral/genetics , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , Virus Inactivation , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/virology , Epidemics/prevention & control , Humans , Nasopharynx/virology , Reagent Kits, Diagnostic , Reproducibility of Results , Reverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction/methods , SARS-CoV-2/physiology , Sensitivity and Specificity , Specimen Handling/methods , Workflow
5.
Clin Microbiol Infect ; 28(1): 93-100, 2022 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1356178

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To analyse nosocomial transmission in the early stages of the coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic at a large multisite healthcare institution. Nosocomial incidence is linked with infection control interventions. METHODS: Viral genome sequence and epidemiological data were analysed for 574 consecutive patients, including 86 nosocomial cases, with a positive PCR test for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) during the first 19 days of the pandemic. RESULTS: Forty-four putative transmission clusters were found through epidemiological analysis; these included 234 cases and all 86 nosocomial cases. SARS-CoV-2 genome sequences were obtained from 168/234 (72%) of these cases in epidemiological clusters, including 77/86 nosocomial cases (90%). Only 75/168 (45%) of epidemiologically linked, sequenced cases were not refuted by applying genomic data, creating 14 final clusters accounting for 59/77 sequenced nosocomial cases (77%). Viral haplotypes from these clusters were enriched 1-14x (median 4x) compared to the community. Three factors implicated unidentified cases in transmission: (a) community-onset or indeterminate cases were absent in 7/14 clusters (50%), (b) four clusters (29%) had additional evidence of cryptic transmission, and (c) in three clusters (21%) diagnosis of the earliest case was delayed, which may have facilitated transmission. Nosocomial cases decreased to low levels (0-2 per day) despite continuing high numbers of admissions of community-onset SARS-CoV-2 cases (40-50 per day) and before the impact of introducing universal face masks and banning hospital visitors. CONCLUSION: Genomics was necessary to accurately resolve transmission clusters. Our data support unidentified cases-such as healthcare workers or asymptomatic patients-as important vectors of transmission. Evidence is needed to ascertain whether routine screening increases case ascertainment and limits nosocomial transmission.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Cross Infection , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/transmission , Cross Infection/epidemiology , Disease Outbreaks , Genome, Viral , Genomics , Hospitals , Humans , Pandemics
6.
Lancet Microbe ; 2(9): e461-e471, 2021 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1294386

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Lateral flow devices (LFDs) for rapid antigen testing are set to become a cornerstone of SARS-CoV-2 mass community testing, although their reduced sensitivity compared with PCR has raised questions of how well they identify infectious cases. Understanding their capabilities and limitations is, therefore, essential for successful implementation. We evaluated six commercial LFDs and assessed their correlation with infectious virus culture and PCR cycle threshold (Ct) values. METHODS: In a single-centre, laboratory evaluation study, we did a head-to-head comparison of six LFDs commercially available in the UK: Innova Rapid SARS-CoV-2 Antigen Test, Spring Healthcare SARS-CoV-2 Antigen Rapid Test Cassette, E25Bio Rapid Diagnostic Test, Encode SARS-CoV-2 Antigen Rapid Test Device, SureScreen COVID-19 Rapid Antigen Test Cassette, and SureScreen COVID-19 Rapid Fluorescence Antigen Test. We estimated the specificities and sensitivities of the LFDs using stored naso-oropharyngeal swabs collected at St Thomas' Hospital (London, UK) for routine diagnostic SARS-CoV-2 testing by real-time RT-PCR (RT-rtPCR). Swabs were from inpatients and outpatients from all departments of St Thomas' Hospital, and from health-care staff (all departments) and their household contacts. SARS-CoV-2-negative swabs from the same population (confirmed by RT-rtPCR) were used for comparative specificity determinations. All samples were collected between March 23 and Oct 27, 2020. We determined the limit of detection (LOD) for each test using viral plaque-forming units (PFUs) and viral RNA copy numbers of laboratory-grown SARS-CoV-2. Additionally, LFDs were selected to assess the correlation of antigen test result with RT-rtPCR Ct values and positive viral culture in Vero E6 cells. This analysis included longitudinal swabs from five infected inpatients with varying disease severities. Furthermore, the sensitivities of available LFDs were assessed in swabs (n=23; collected from Dec 4, 2020, to Jan 12, 2021) confirmed to be positive (RT-rtPCR and whole-genome sequencing) for the B.1.1.7 variant, which was the dominant genotype in the UK at the time of study completion. FINDINGS: All LFDs showed high specificity (≥98·0%), except for the E25Bio test (86·0% [95% CI 77·9-99·9]), and most tests reliably detected 50 PFU/test (equivalent SARS-CoV-2 N gene Ct value of 23·7, or RNA copy number of 3 × 106/mL). Sensitivities of the LFDs on clinical samples ranged from 65·0% (55·2-73·6) to 89·0% (81·4-93·8). These sensitivities increased to greater than 90% for samples with Ct values of lower than 25 for all tests except the SureScreen fluorescence (SureScreen-F) test. Positive virus culture was identified in 57 (40·4%) of 141 samples; 54 (94·7%) of the positive cultures were from swabs with Ct values lower than 25. Among the three LFDs selected for detailed comparisons (the tests with highest sensitivity [Innova], highest specificity [Encode], and alternative technology [SureScreen-F]), sensitivity of the LFDs increased to at least 94·7% when only including samples with detected viral growth. Longitudinal studies of RT-rtPCR-positive samples (tested with Innova, Encode, and both SureScreen-F and the SureScreen visual [SureScreen-V] test) showed that most of the tests identified all infectious samples as positive. Test performance (assessed for Innova and SureScreen-V) was not affected when reassessed on swabs positive for the UK variant B.1.1.7. INTERPRETATION: In this comprehensive comparison of antigen LFDs and virus infectivity, we found a clear relationship between Ct values, quantitative culture of infectious virus, and antigen LFD positivity in clinical samples. Our data support regular testing of target groups with LFDs to supplement the current PCR testing capacity, which would help to rapidly identify infected individuals in situations in which they would otherwise go undetected. FUNDING: King's Together Rapid COVID-19, Medical Research Council, Wellcome Trust, Huo Family Foundation, UK Department of Health, National Institute for Health Research Comprehensive Biomedical Research Centre.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19 Testing , Humans , RNA, Viral/genetics
7.
ACS Appl Mater Interfaces ; 13(22): 25694-25700, 2021 Jun 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1246315

ABSTRACT

Containing the global severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic has been an unprecedented challenge due to high horizontal transmissivity and asymptomatic carriage rates. Lateral flow device (LFD) immunoassays were introduced in late 2020 to detect SARS-CoV-2 infection in asymptomatic or presymptomatic individuals rapidly. While LFD technologies have been used for over 60 years, their widespread use as a public health tool during a pandemic is unprecedented. By the end of 2020, data from studies into the efficacy of the LFDs emerged and showed these point-of-care devices to have very high specificity (ability to identify true negatives) but inadequate sensitivity with high false-negative rates. The low sensitivity (<50%) shown in several studies is a critical public health concern, as asymptomatic or presymptomatic carriers may wrongly be assumed to be noninfectious, posing a significant risk of further spread in the community. Here, we show that the direct visual readout of SARS-CoV-2 LFDs is an inadequate approach to discriminate a potentially infective viral concentration in a biosample. We quantified significant immobilized antigen-antibody-labeled conjugate complexes within the LFDs visually scored as negative using high-sensitivity synchrotron X-ray fluorescence imaging. Correlating quantitative X-ray fluorescence measurements and quantitative reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (qRT-PCR) determined numbers of viral copies, we identified that negatively scored samples could contain up to 100 PFU (equivalent here to ∼10 000 RNA copies/test). The study demonstrates where the shortcomings arise in many of the current direct-readout SARS-CoV-2 LFDs, namely, being a deficiency in the readout as opposed to the potential level of detection of the test, which is orders of magnitude higher. The present findings are of importance both to public health monitoring during the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and to the rapid refinement of these tools for immediate and future applications.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/virology , Immunoassay/instrumentation , SARS Virus/isolation & purification , Animals , Chlorocebus aethiops , Microscopy, Electron, Transmission , Real-Time Polymerase Chain Reaction , Reference Standards , SARS Virus/ultrastructure , Sensitivity and Specificity , Spectrometry, X-Ray Emission , Vero Cells
8.
Immunity ; 54(6): 1276-1289.e6, 2021 06 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1163900

ABSTRACT

Interaction of the SARS-CoV-2 Spike receptor binding domain (RBD) with the receptor ACE2 on host cells is essential for viral entry. RBD is the dominant target for neutralizing antibodies, and several neutralizing epitopes on RBD have been molecularly characterized. Analysis of circulating SARS-CoV-2 variants has revealed mutations arising in the RBD, N-terminal domain (NTD) and S2 subunits of Spike. To understand how these mutations affect Spike antigenicity, we isolated and characterized >100 monoclonal antibodies targeting epitopes on RBD, NTD, and S2 from SARS-CoV-2-infected individuals. Approximately 45% showed neutralizing activity, of which ∼20% were NTD specific. NTD-specific antibodies formed two distinct groups: the first was highly potent against infectious virus, whereas the second was less potent and displayed glycan-dependant neutralization activity. Mutations present in B.1.1.7 Spike frequently conferred neutralization resistance to NTD-specific antibodies. This work demonstrates that neutralizing antibodies targeting subdominant epitopes should be considered when investigating antigenic drift in emerging variants.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Monoclonal/immunology , Antibodies, Viral/immunology , COVID-19/immunology , COVID-19/virology , Epitopes/immunology , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Spike Glycoprotein, Coronavirus/immunology , Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme 2/chemistry , Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme 2/metabolism , Antibodies, Monoclonal/chemistry , Antibodies, Neutralizing/immunology , Antibodies, Viral/chemistry , COVID-19/diagnosis , Cross Reactions/immunology , Epitopes/chemistry , Epitopes/genetics , Humans , Models, Molecular , Mutation , Neutralization Tests , Protein Binding/immunology , Protein Conformation , Spike Glycoprotein, Coronavirus/chemistry , Spike Glycoprotein, Coronavirus/genetics , Structure-Activity Relationship
9.
J Virol ; 95(9)2021 04 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1075938

ABSTRACT

The cellular entry of severe acute respiratory syndrome-associated coronaviruses types 1 and 2 (SARS-CoV-1 and -2) requires sequential protease processing of the viral spike glycoprotein. The presence of a polybasic cleavage site in SARS-CoV-2 spike at the S1/S2 boundary has been suggested to be a factor in the increased transmissibility of SARS-CoV-2 compared to SARS-CoV-1 by facilitating maturation of the spike precursor by furin-like proteases in the producer cells rather than endosomal cathepsins in the target. We investigate the relevance of the polybasic cleavage site in the route of entry of SARS-CoV-2 and the consequences this has for sensitivity to interferons (IFNs) and, more specifically, the IFN-induced transmembrane (IFITM) protein family that inhibit entry of diverse enveloped viruses. We found that SARS-CoV-2 is restricted predominantly by IFITM2, rather than IFITM3, and the degree of this restriction is governed by route of viral entry. Importantly, removal of the cleavage site in the spike protein renders SARS-CoV-2 entry highly pH and cathepsin dependent in late endosomes, where, like SARS-CoV-1 spike, it is more sensitive to IFITM2 restriction. Furthermore, we found that potent inhibition of SARS-CoV-2 replication by type I but not type II IFNs is alleviated by targeted depletion of IFITM2 expression. We propose that the polybasic cleavage site allows SARS-CoV-2 to mediate viral entry in a pH-independent manner, in part to mitigate against IFITM-mediated restriction and promote replication and transmission. This suggests that therapeutic strategies that target furin-mediated cleavage of SARS-CoV-2 spike may reduce viral replication through the activity of type I IFNs.IMPORTANCE The furin cleavage site in the spike protein is a distinguishing feature of SARS-CoV-2 and has been proposed to be a determinant for the higher transmissibility between individuals, compared to SARS-CoV-1. One explanation for this is that it permits more efficient activation of fusion at or near the cell surface rather than requiring processing in the endosome of the target cell. Here, we show that SARS-CoV-2 is inhibited by antiviral membrane protein IFITM2 and that the sensitivity is exacerbated by deletion of the furin cleavage site, which restricts viral entry to low pH compartments. Furthermore, we find that IFITM2 is a significant effector of the antiviral activity of type I interferons against SARS-CoV-2 replication. We suggest that one role of the furin cleavage site is to reduce SARS-CoV-2 sensitivity to innate immune restriction, and thus, it may represent a potential therapeutic target for COVID-19 treatment development.


Subject(s)
Interferon Type I/metabolism , Membrane Proteins/metabolism , Proteolysis , SARS-CoV-2/physiology , Spike Glycoprotein, Coronavirus/metabolism , Virus Internalization , Virus Replication , A549 Cells , Humans , Interferon Type I/genetics , Membrane Proteins/genetics , Spike Glycoprotein, Coronavirus/genetics
10.
Nat Microbiol ; 5(12): 1598-1607, 2020 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-892039

ABSTRACT

Antibody responses to SARS-CoV-2 can be detected in most infected individuals 10-15 d after the onset of COVID-19 symptoms. However, due to the recent emergence of SARS-CoV-2 in the human population, it is not known how long antibody responses will be maintained or whether they will provide protection from reinfection. Using sequential serum samples collected up to 94 d post onset of symptoms (POS) from 65 individuals with real-time quantitative PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, we show seroconversion (immunoglobulin (Ig)M, IgA, IgG) in >95% of cases and neutralizing antibody responses when sampled beyond 8 d POS. We show that the kinetics of the neutralizing antibody response is typical of an acute viral infection, with declining neutralizing antibody titres observed after an initial peak, and that the magnitude of this peak is dependent on disease severity. Although some individuals with high peak infective dose (ID50 > 10,000) maintained neutralizing antibody titres >1,000 at >60 d POS, some with lower peak ID50 had neutralizing antibody titres approaching baseline within the follow-up period. A similar decline in neutralizing antibody titres was observed in a cohort of 31 seropositive healthcare workers. The present study has important implications when considering widespread serological testing and antibody protection against reinfection with SARS-CoV-2, and may suggest that vaccine boosters are required to provide long-lasting protection.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Neutralizing/immunology , COVID-19/immunology , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Antibodies, Neutralizing/blood , Antibodies, Viral/blood , Antibodies, Viral/immunology , COVID-19/blood , COVID-19/pathology , Female , Humans , Kinetics , Longitudinal Studies , Male , Middle Aged , Seroconversion , Severity of Illness Index , Young Adult
11.
PLoS Pathog ; 16(9): e1008817, 2020 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-793175

ABSTRACT

There is a clear requirement for an accurate SARS-CoV-2 antibody test, both as a complement to existing diagnostic capabilities and for determining community seroprevalence. We therefore evaluated the performance of a variety of antibody testing technologies and their potential use as diagnostic tools. Highly specific in-house ELISAs were developed for the detection of anti-spike (S), -receptor binding domain (RBD) and -nucleocapsid (N) antibodies and used for the cross-comparison of ten commercial serological assays-a chemiluminescence-based platform, two ELISAs and seven colloidal gold lateral flow immunoassays (LFIAs)-on an identical panel of 110 SARS-CoV-2-positive samples and 50 pre-pandemic negatives. There was a wide variation in the performance of the different platforms, with specificity ranging from 82% to 100%, and overall sensitivity from 60.9% to 87.3%. However, the head-to-head comparison of multiple sero-diagnostic assays on identical sample sets revealed that performance is highly dependent on the time of sampling, with sensitivities of over 95% seen in several tests when assessing samples from more than 20 days post onset of symptoms. Furthermore, these analyses identified clear outlying samples that were negative in all tests, but were later shown to be from individuals with mildest disease presentation. Rigorous comparison of antibody testing platforms will inform the deployment of point-of-care technologies in healthcare settings and their use in the monitoring of SARS-CoV-2 infections.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Viral/analysis , Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis , Point-of-Care Systems , Serologic Tests/methods , Adult , Aged , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , COVID-19 Testing , Clinical Laboratory Techniques , Community Health Services , Coronavirus Nucleocapsid Proteins , Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay , Female , Hospitals , Humans , Immunoassay , Luminescent Measurements , Male , Middle Aged , Nucleocapsid Proteins/immunology , Pandemics , Phosphoproteins , SARS-CoV-2 , Sensitivity and Specificity , Spike Glycoprotein, Coronavirus/immunology
12.
Analyst ; 145(16): 5638-5646, 2020 Aug 21.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-637680

ABSTRACT

An evaluation of a rapid portable gold-nanotechnology measuring SARS-CoV-2 IgM, IgA and IgG antibody concentrations against spike 1 (S1), spike 2 (S) and nucleocapsid (N) was conducted using serum samples from 74 patients tested for SARS-CoV-2 RNA on admission to hospital, and 47 historical control patients from March 2019. 59 patients were RNA(+) and 15 were RNA(-). A serum (±) classification was derived for all three antigens and a quantitative serological profile was obtained. Serum(+) was identified in 30% (95% CI 11-48) of initially RNA(-) patients, in 36% (95% CI 17-54) of RNA(+) patients before 10 days, 77% (95% CI 67-87) between 10 and 20 days and 95% (95% CI 86-100) after 21 days. The patient-level diagnostic accuracy relative to RNA(±) after 10 days displayed 88% sensitivity (95% CI 75-95) and 75% specificity (95% CI 22-99), although specificity compared with historical controls was 100% (95%CI 91-100). This study provides robust support for further evaluation and validation of this novel technology in a clinical setting and highlights challenges inherent in assessment of serological tests for an emerging disease such as COVID-19.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Viral/analysis , Betacoronavirus/immunology , Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis , Serologic Tests/methods , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Antibodies, Viral/immunology , COVID-19 , COVID-19 Testing , Clinical Laboratory Techniques , Cohort Studies , Coronavirus Infections/blood , Coronavirus Nucleocapsid Proteins , False Negative Reactions , Female , Gold/chemistry , Humans , Immunoglobulin A/analysis , Immunoglobulin A/immunology , Immunoglobulin G/analysis , Immunoglobulin G/immunology , Immunoglobulin M/analysis , Immunoglobulin M/immunology , Male , Metal Nanoparticles/chemistry , Middle Aged , Nucleocapsid Proteins/immunology , Pandemics , Phosphoproteins , Pneumonia, Viral/blood , SARS-CoV-2 , Sensitivity and Specificity , Spike Glycoprotein, Coronavirus/immunology , Young Adult
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL