Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
1.
J Clin Virol ; 142: 104897, 2021 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1313211

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: Assess the performance of five SARS-CoV-2 rapid serological tests (RST) using finger prick (FP) blood on-site to evaluate their usability for exposure assessment in population-based seroprevalence studies. STUDY DESIGN: Since cross-reactivity with common cold human coronaviruses occurs, serological testing includes a risk of false-positive results. Therefore, the selected cohort for RST-validation was based on combined immunoassay (presence of specific antibodies) and RT-qPCR (presence of SARS-CoV-2) data. RST-performance for FP blood and serum was assessed by performing each RST in two groups, namely SARSCoV- 2 positive (n=108) and negative healthcare workers (n=89). Differences in accuracy and positive and negative predictive values (PPV, NPV) were calculated for a range (1-50%) of SARS-CoV-2 prevalence estimates. RESULTS: The OrientGene showed overall acceptable performance, with sensitivities of 94.4% and 100%, and specificities of 96.6% and 94.4%, using FP blood and serum, respectively. Although three RST reach optimal specificities (100%), the OrientGene clearly outperforms in sensitivity. At a SARS-CoV-2 prevalence rate of 40%, this RST outperforms the other tests in NPV (96.3%) and reaches comparable PPV (94.9%). Although the specificity of the Covid-Presto is excellent when using FP blood or serum (100% and 97.8%, respectively), its sensitivity decreases when using FP blood (76.9%) compared to serum (98.1%). CONCLUSIONS: Performances of the evaluated RST differ largely. Only one out of five RST (OrientGene) had acceptable sensitivity and specificity using FP blood. Therefore, the latter could be used for seroprevalence studies in a high-prevalence situation. The OrientGene, which measures anti-RBD antibodies, can be valuable after vaccination as well.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Antibodies, Viral , Humans , Sensitivity and Specificity , Seroepidemiologic Studies , Serologic Tests
2.
Int J Occup Med Environ Health ; 34(2): 203-209, 2021 May 27.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1140809

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) had spread worldwide since December 2019 and became a pandemic in March 2020. The diagnosis of an active infection is based on the real-time reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from the nasopharyngeal swab specimen. The aim of the current analysis was to assess the usefulness of the rapid serological tests for diagnosing SARS-CoV-2 infections. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The rapid serological tests detecting IgG/IgM antibodies for SARS-CoV-2 were voluntarily performed in asymptomatic employees of 2 companies. The examination was conducted at the date and time selected online by the study participants. The testing team consisted of 2 nurses collecting the samples and 1 doctor who interpreted the results. Each positive rapid test result was verified by an RT-PCR examination from a nasopharyngeal swab. The testing kits named Vazyme: 2019-nCoV IgG/IgM Detection Kit (Colloidal Gold-Based) were provided by the employer along with the manual and certificates. RESULTS: The overall interest in testing among employees was below the employer's expectations and reached 30% and 20% in each of the 2 companies, respectively. A total of 516 participants were included in the analysis. Ten positive results of the rapid tests were documented, including 7 for IgM and 3 for IgG antibodies. No positive result was confirmed by the detection of the genetic material of the SARS-CoV-2 by the RT-PCR examination. CONCLUSIONS: Herein, the authors demonstrated the uselessness of rapid serological tests performed in asymptomatic volunteers for diagnosing SARS-CoV-2 infections. Int J Occup Med Environ Health. 2021;34(2):203-9.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Viral/analysis , COVID-19/epidemiology , Immunoglobulin G/analysis , Immunoglobulin M/analysis , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Adult , COVID-19/immunology , COVID-19/virology , Female , Humans , Immunoglobulin M/immunology , Male , Middle Aged
3.
Biosens Bioelectron ; 172: 112765, 2021 Jan 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-893624

ABSTRACT

To accurately diagnose COVID-19 infection and its time-dependent progression, the rapid, sensitive, and noninvasive determination of immunoglobulins A specific to SARS-CoV-2 (IgA) in saliva and serum is needed to complement tests that detect immunoglobulins G and M. We have developed a dual optical/chemiluminescence format of a lateral flow immunoassay (LFIA) immunosensor for IgA in serum and saliva. A recombinant nucleocapsid antigen specifically captures SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in patient specimens. A labelled anti-human IgA reveals the bound IgA fraction. A dual colorimetric and chemiluminescence detection enables the affordable and ultrasensitive determination of IgA to SARS-CoV-2. Specifically, a simple smartphone-camera-based device measures the colour signal provided by nanogold-labelled anti-human IgA. For the ultrasensitive chemiluminescence transduction, we used a contact imaging portable device based on cooled CCD, and measured the light signal resulting from the reaction of the HRP-labelled anti-human IgA with a H2O2/luminol/enhancers substrate. A total of 25 serum and 9 saliva samples from infected and/or recovered individuals were analysed by the colorimetric LFIA, which was sensitive and reproducible enough for the semi-quantification of IgA in subjects with a strong serological response and in the early stage of COVID-19 infection. Switching to CL detection, the same immunosensor exhibited higher detection capability, revealing the presence of salivary IgA in infected individuals. For the patients included in the study (n = 4), the level of salivary IgA correlated with the time elapsed from diagnosis and with the severity of the disease. This IgA-LFIA immunosensor could be useful for noninvasively monitoring early immune responses to COVID-19 and for investigating the diagnostic/prognostic utility of salivary IgA in the context of large-scale screening to assess the efficacy of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Viral/analysis , Biosensing Techniques/instrumentation , COVID-19 Serological Testing/instrumentation , COVID-19/diagnosis , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Antibody Specificity , Biosensing Techniques/methods , COVID-19/immunology , COVID-19/virology , COVID-19 Serological Testing/methods , Colorimetry/instrumentation , Colorimetry/methods , Equipment Design , Humans , Immunoglobulin A/blood , Immunoglobulin A, Secretory/analysis , Luminescent Measurements/instrumentation , Luminescent Measurements/methods , Saliva/immunology
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL