Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 4 de 4
Filter
1.
Microbiol Spectr ; : e0105422, 2022 Jun 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1874514

ABSTRACT

Serological assays for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies must be validated for performance with a large panel of clinical specimens. Most existing assays utilize a single antigen target and may be subject to reduced diagnostic specificity. This study evaluated a multiplex assay that detects antibodies to three SARS-CoV-2 targets. Human serum specimens (n = 323) with known previous SARS-CoV-2 exposure status were tested on a commercially available multiplex bead assay (MBA) measuring IgG to SARS-CoV-2 spike protein receptor-binding domain (RBD), nucleocapsid protein (NP), and RBD/NP fusion antigens. Assay performance was evaluated against reverse transcriptase PCR (RT-PCR) results and also compared with test results for two single-target commercial assays. The MBA had a diagnostic sensitivity of 89.8% and a specificity of 100%, with serum collection at >28 days following COVID-19 symptom onset showing the highest seropositivity rates (sensitivity: 94.7%). The MBA performed comparably to single-target assays with the ability to detect IgG against specific antigen targets, with 19 (5.9%) discrepant specimens compared to the NP IgG assay and 12 (3.7%) compared to the S1 RBD IgG assay (kappa coefficients 0.92 and 0.88 compared to NP IgG and S1 RBD IgG assays, respectively. These findings highlight inherent advantages of using a SARS-CoV-2 serological test with multiple antigen targets; specifically, the ability to detect IgG against RBD and NP antigens simultaneously. In particular, the 100.0% diagnostic specificity exhibited by the MBA in this study is important for its implementation in populations with low SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence or where background antibody reactivity to SARS-CoV-2 antigens has been detected. IMPORTANCE Reporting of SARS-CoV-2 infections through nucleic acid or antigen based diagnostic tests severely underestimates the true burden of exposure in a population. Serological data assaying for antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 antigens offers an alternative source of data to estimate population exposure, but most current immunoassays only include a single target for antibody detection. This report outlines a direct comparison of a multiplex bead assay to two other commercial single-target assays in their ability to detect IgG against SARS-CoV-2 antigens. Against a well-defined panel of 323 serum specimens, diagnostic sensitivity and specificity were very high for the multiplex assay, with strong agreement in IgG detection for single targets compared to the single-target assays. Collection of more data for individual- and population-level seroprofiles allows further investigation into more accurate exposure estimates and research into the determinants of infection and convalescent responses.

2.
Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol ; : 1-24, 2021 Nov 22.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1527934

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: Characterize and compare SARS-CoV-2-specific immune responses in plasma and gingival crevicular fluid (GCF) from nursing home residents during and after natural infection. DESIGN: Prospective cohort. SETTING: Nursing home. PARTICIPANTS: SARS-CoV-2-infected nursing home residents. METHODS: A convenience sample of 14 SARS-CoV-2-infected nursing home residents, enrolled 4-13 days after real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction diagnosis, were followed for 42 days. Post diagnosis, plasma SARS-CoV-2-specific pan-Immunoglobulin (Ig), IgG, IgA, IgM, and neutralizing antibodies were measured at 5 timepoints and GCF SARS-CoV-2-specific IgG and IgA were measured at 4 timepoints. RESULTS: All participants demonstrated immune responses to SARS-CoV-2 infection. Among 12 phlebotomized participants, plasma was positive for pan-Ig and IgG in all 12, neutralizing antibodies in 11, IgM in 10, and IgA in 9. Among 14 participants with GCF specimens, GCF was positive for IgG in 13 and IgA in 12. Immunoglobulin responses in plasma and GCF had similar kinetics; median times to peak antibody response was similar across specimen types (4 weeks for IgG; 3 weeks for IgA). Participants with pan-Ig, IgG, and IgA detected in plasma and GCF IgG remained positive through this evaluation's end 46-55 days post-diagnosis. All participants were viral culture negative by the first detection of antibodies. CONCLUSIONS: Nursing home residents had detectable SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in plasma and GCF after infection. Kinetics of antibodies detected in GCF mirrored those from plasma. Non-invasive GCF may be useful for detecting and monitoring immunologic responses in populations unable or unwilling to be phlebotomized.

3.
Sci Rep ; 11(1): 12330, 2021 06 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1265968

ABSTRACT

SARS-CoV-2 emerged in late 2019 and has since spread around the world, causing a pandemic of the respiratory disease COVID-19. Detecting antibodies against the virus is an essential tool for tracking infections and developing vaccines. Such tests, primarily utilizing the enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) principle, can be either qualitative (reporting positive/negative results) or quantitative (reporting a value representing the quantity of specific antibodies). Quantitation is vital for determining stability or decline of antibody titers in convalescence, efficacy of different vaccination regimens, and detection of asymptomatic infections. Quantitation typically requires two-step ELISA testing, in which samples are first screened in a qualitative assay and positive samples are subsequently analyzed as a dilution series. To overcome the throughput limitations of this approach, we developed a simpler and faster system that is highly automatable and achieves quantitation in a single-dilution screening format with sensitivity and specificity comparable to those of ELISA.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Viral/blood , COVID-19/blood , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Animals , Antibodies, Viral/immunology , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/immunology , COVID-19 Serological Testing/economics , COVID-19 Serological Testing/methods , Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay/economics , Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay/methods , Humans , Immunoglobulin G/blood , Immunoglobulin G/immunology , Immunoglobulin M/blood , Immunoglobulin M/immunology , Mice , SARS-CoV-2/immunology
4.
Am J Public Health ; 111(5): 907-916, 2021 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1177867

ABSTRACT

Objectives. To assess SARS-CoV-2 transmission within a correctional facility and recommend mitigation strategies.Methods. From April 29 to May 15, 2020, we established the point prevalence of COVID-19 among incarcerated persons and staff within a correctional facility in Arkansas. Participants provided respiratory specimens for SARS-CoV-2 testing and completed questionnaires on symptoms and factors associated with transmission.Results. Of 1647 incarcerated persons and 128 staff tested, 30.5% of incarcerated persons (range by housing unit = 0.0%-58.2%) and 2.3% of staff tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. Among those who tested positive and responded to symptom questions (431 incarcerated persons, 3 staff), 81.2% and 33.3% were asymptomatic, respectively. Most incarcerated persons (58.0%) reported wearing cloth face coverings 8 hours or less per day, and 63.3% reported close contact with someone other than their bunkmate.Conclusions. If testing remained limited to symptomatic individuals, fewer cases would have been detected or detection would have been delayed, allowing transmission to continue. Rapid implementation of mass testing and strict enforcement of infection prevention and control measures may be needed to mitigate spread of SARS-CoV-2 in this setting.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Testing , COVID-19 , Correctional Facilities/statistics & numerical data , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Arkansas/epidemiology , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/transmission , Housing/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Prevalence , Prisoners/statistics & numerical data , Surveys and Questionnaires
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL