Automated, flow-based chemiluminescence microarray immunoassay for the rapid multiplex detection of IgG antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 in human serum and plasma (CoVRapid CL-MIA).

In the face of the COVID-19 pandemic, the need for rapid serological tests that allow multiplexing emerged, as antibody seropositivity can instruct about individual immunity after an infection with SARS-CoV-2 or after vaccination. As many commercial antibody tests are either time-consuming or tend to produce false negative or false positive results when only one antigen is considered, we developed an automated, flow-based chemiluminescence microarray immunoassay (CL-MIA) that allows for the detection of IgG antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 receptor-binding domain (RBD), spike protein (S1 fragment), and nucleocapsid protein (N) in human serum and plasma in less than 8 min. The CoVRapid CL-MIA was tested with a set of 65 SARS-CoV-2 serology positive or negative samples, resulting in 100% diagnostic specificity and 100% diagnostic sensitivity, thus even outcompeting commercial tests run on the same sample set. Additionally, the prospect of future quantitative assessments (i.e., quantifying the level of antibodies) was demonstrated. Due to the fully automated process, the test can easily be operated in hospitals, medical practices, or vaccination centers, offering a valuable tool for COVID-19 serosurveillance. Graphical abstract.

Evaluation of the analytical performance of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody test kits distributed or developed in Japan.

Background: With the spread of COVID-19, anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody tests have been utilized. Herein we evaluated the analytical performance of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody test kits using a new reference standard prepared from COVID-19 patient sera. Methods: Fifty-seven kits in total (16 immunochromatography types, 11 ELISA types and 30 types for automated analyzers) were examined. By measuring serially diluted reference standards, the maximum dilution factor showing a positive result and its precision were investigated. Results: The measured cut-off titers varied largely depending on the antibody kit; however, the variability was small, with the titers obtained by each kit being within twofold in most cases. Conclusion: The current results suggest that a suitable kit should be selected depending on the intended purpose.

ViralFlow: A Versatile Automated Workflow for SARS-CoV-2 Genome Assembly, Lineage Assignment, Mutations and Intrahost Variant Detection.

The COVID-19 pandemic is driven by Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) that emerged in 2019 and quickly spread worldwide. Genomic surveillance has become the gold standard methodology used to monitor and study this fast-spreading virus and its constantly emerging lineages. The current deluge of SARS-CoV-2 genomic data generated worldwide has put additional pressure on the urgent need for streamlined bioinformatics workflows. Here, we describe a workflow developed by our group to process and analyze large-scale SARS-CoV-2 Illumina amplicon sequencing data. This workflow automates all steps of SARS-CoV-2 reference-based genomic analysis: data processing, genome assembly, PANGO lineage assignment, mutation analysis and the screening of intrahost variants. The pipeline is capable of processing a batch of around 100 samples in less than half an hour on a personal laptop or in less than five minutes on a server with 50 threads. The workflow presented here is available through Docker or Singularity images, allowing for implementation on laptops for small-scale analyses or on high processing capacity servers or clusters. Moreover, the low requirements for memory and CPU cores and the standardized results provided by ViralFlow highlight it as a versatile tool for SARS-CoV-2 genomic analysis.

Performance Evaluation of the Siemens SARS-CoV-2 Total Antibody and IgG Antibody Test.

OBJECTIVE: In this study, the performance of 2 commercially available SARS-CoV-2 antibody assays is evaluated. METHODS: The Siemens SARS-CoV-2 Total (COV2T) and IgG (COV2G) antibody tests were evaluated on a Siemens Atellica IM1300 analyzer. Imprecision was assessed with the CLSI EP15 protocol using positive controls. Ninety control group specimens were analyzed for specificity, and 175 specimens from 58 patients with polymerase chain reaction-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 were measured for the sensitivity and kinetics of the antibody response. RESULTS: Within-run and total imprecision were acceptable for both assays. Both tests showed a specificity of 100%. Sensitivity earlier in the disease state was greater for the COV2T assay than for the COV2G assay, but sensitivity >14 days after onset of symptoms approached 100% for both. For all patients, antibody titers remained above the seroconversion cutoff for all follow-up specimens. CONCLUSION: This study shows acceptable performance for both the Siemens COV2T and COV2G test, although seroconversion occurs earlier with the COV2T test.

Utility of Antigen-Based Rapid Diagnostic Test for Detection of SARS-CoV-2 Virus in Routine Hospital Settings.

OBJECTIVE: This study aims to evaluate the performance of an antigen-based rapid diagnostic test (RDT) for the detection of the SARS-CoV-2 virus. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted on 677 patients. Two nasopharyngeal swabs and 1 oropharyngeal swab were collected from patients. The RDT was performed onsite by a commercially available immune-chromatographic assay on the nasopharyngeal swab. The nasopharyngeal and oropharyngeal swabs were examined for SARS-CoV-2 RNA by real-time reverse-transcription quantitative polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR) assay. RESULTS: The overall sensitivity of the SARS-CoV-2 RDT was 34.5% and the specificity was 99.8%. The positive predictive value and negative predictive value of the test were 96.6% and 91.5%, respectively. The detection rate of RDT in RT-qPCR positive results was high (45%) for cycle threshold values <25. CONCLUSION: The utility of RDT is in diagnosing symptomatic patients and may not be particularly suited as a screening tool for patients with low viral load. The low sensitivity of RDT does not qualify its use as a single test in patients who test negative; RT-qPCR continues to be the gold standard test.

Specific detection of memory T-cells in COVID-19 patients using standardized whole-blood Interferon gammarelease assay.

Antigen-specific T-cells are essential for protective immunity against SARS-CoV-2. We set up a semi-automated whole-blood Interferon-gamma release assay (WB IGRA) to monitor the T-cell response after stimulation with SARS-CoV-2 peptide pools. We report that the WB IGRA is complementary to serological assays to assess SARS-CoV-2 immunity.

Prediction of False-Positive Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) Molecular Results in a High-Throughput Open-Platform System.

Widespread high-throughput testing for identification of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection by RT-PCR has been a foundation in the response to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Quality assurance metrics for these RT-PCR tests are still evolving as testing is widely implemented. As testing increases, it is important to understand performance characteristics and the errors associated with these tests. Herein, we investigate a high-throughput, laboratory-developed SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR assay to determine whether modeling can generate quality control metrics that identify false-positive (FP) results due to contamination. This study reviewed repeated clinical samples focusing on positive samples that test negative on re-extraction and PCR, likely representing false positives. To identify and predict false-positive samples, we constructed machine learning-derived models based on the extraction method used. These models identified variables associated with false-positive results across all methods, with sensitivities for predicting FP results ranging between 67% and 100%. Application of the models to all results predicted a total FP rate of 0.08% across all samples, or 2.3% of positive results, similar to reports for other RT-PCR tests for RNA viruses. These models can predict quality control parameters, enabling laboratories to generate decision trees that reduce interpretation errors, allow for automated reflex testing of samples with a high FP probability, improve workflow efficiency, and increase diagnostic accuracy for patient care.

Serum Lateral Flow assay with digital reader for the diagnosis of invasive pulmonary aspergillosis: A two-centre mixed cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Detection of galactomannan (GM) from bronchoalveolar lavage fluid (BALF) or serum is broadly used for diagnosis of invasive aspergillosis (IA), although the sensitivity of GM from serum is lower in non-neutropenic patients. We evaluated the Aspergillus galactomannan Lateral Flow assay (LFA) with digital readout from serum in a mixed cohort of patients. METHODS: We performed a retrospective two-centre study evaluating the LFA from serum of patients with clinical suspicion of IA obtained between 2015 and 2021 at the University of California San Diego and the Medical University of Graz. The sensitivity and specificity was calculated for proven/probable aspergillosis versus no aspergillosis. Correlation with same-sample GM was calculated using Spearman correlation analysis and kappa statistics. RESULTS: In total, 122 serum samples from 122 patients were analysed, including proven IA (n = 1), probable IA or coronavirus-associated pulmonary aspergillosis (CAPA) (n = 27), and no IA/CAPA/non-classifiable (n = 94). At a 0.5 ODI cut-off, the sensitivity and specificity of the LFA was 78.6% and 80.5%. Spearman correlation analysis showed a strong correlation between serum LFA ODI and serum GM ODI (ρ 0.459, p < .0001). Kappa was 0.611 when both LFA and GM were used with a 0.5 ODI cut-off, showing substantial agreement (p < .001). DISCUSSION: The LFA with digital read out from serum showed good performance for the diagnosis of probable/proven aspergillosis, with substantial agreement to GM from serum. Like the LFA from BALF, the LFA from serum may serve as a more rapid test compared to conventional GM, particularly in settings where GM is not readily available.

A mass spectrometry-based targeted assay for detection of SARS-CoV-2 antigen from clinical specimens.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has overwhelmed health systems worldwide and highlighted limitations of diagnostic testing. Several types of diagnostic tests including RT-PCR-based assays and antigen detection by lateral flow assays, each with their own strengths and weaknesses, have been developed and deployed in a short time. METHODS: Here, we describe an immunoaffinity purification approach followed a by high resolution mass spectrometry-based targeted qualitative assay capable of detecting SARS-CoV-2 viral antigen from nasopharyngeal swab samples. Based on our discovery experiments using purified virus, recombinant viral protein and nasopharyngeal swab samples from COVID-19 positive patients, nucleocapsid protein was selected as a target antigen. We then developed an automated antibody capture-based workflow coupled to targeted high-field asymmetric waveform ion mobility spectrometry (FAIMS) - parallel reaction monitoring (PRM) assay on an Orbitrap Exploris 480 mass spectrometer. An ensemble machine learning-based model for determining COVID-19 positive samples was developed using fragment ion intensities from the PRM data. FINDINGS: The optimized targeted assay, which was used to analyze 88 positive and 88 negative nasopharyngeal swab samples for validation, resulted in 98% (95% CI = 0.922-0.997) (86/88) sensitivity and 100% (95% CI = 0.958-1.000) (88/88) specificity using RT-PCR-based molecular testing as the reference method. INTERPRETATION: Our results demonstrate that direct detection of infectious agents from clinical samples by tandem mass spectrometry-based assays have potential to be deployed as diagnostic assays in clinical laboratories, which has hitherto been limited to analysis of pure microbial cultures. FUNDING: This study was supported by DBT/Wellcome Trust India Alliance Margdarshi Fellowship grant IA/M/15/1/502023 awarded to AP and the generosity of Eric and Wendy Schmidt.

Evaluation of automated molecular tests for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 in pooled nasopharyngeal and saliva specimens.

BACKGROUND: Pooling of samples for SARS-CoV-2 testing in low-prevalence settings has been used as an effective strategy to expand testing capacity and mitigate challenges with the shortage of supplies. We evaluated two automated molecular test systems for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA in pooled specimens. METHODS: Pooled nasopharyngeal and saliva specimens were tested by Qiagen QIAstat-Dx Respiratory SARS-CoV-2 Panel (QIAstat) or Cepheid Xpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2 (Xpert), and the results were compared to that of standard RT-qPCR tests without pooling. RESULTS: In nasopharyngeal specimens, the sensitivity/specificity of the pool testing approach, with 5 and 10 specimens per pool, were 77%/100% (n = 105) and 74.1%/100% (n = 260) by QIAstat, and 97.1%/100% (n = 250) and 100%/99.5% (n = 200) by Xpert, respectively. Pool testing of saliva (10 specimens per pool; n = 150) by Xpert resulted in 87.5% sensitivity and 99.3% specificity compared to individual tests. Pool size of 5 or 10 specimens did not significantly affect the difference of RT-qPCR cycle threshold (CT ) from standard testing. RT-qPCR CT values obtained with pool testing by both QIAstat and Xpert were positively correlated with that of individual testing (Pearson's correlation coefficient r = 0.85 to 0.99, p < 0.05). However, the CT values from Xpert were significantly stronger (p < 0.01, paired t test) than that of QIAstat in a subset of SARS-CoV-2 positive specimens, with mean differences of -4.3 ± 2.43 and -4.6 ± 2 for individual and pooled tests, respectively. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that Xpert SARS-CoV-2 can be utilized for pooled sample testing for COVID-19 screening in low-prevalence settings providing significant cost savings and improving throughput without affecting test quality.

Accessioning and automation compatible anterior nares swab design.

The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in an unparalleled need for viral testing capacity across the world and is a critical requirement for successful re-opening of economies. The logistical barriers to near-universal testing are considerable. We have designed an injection molded polypropylene anterior nares swab, the Rhinostic, with a screw cap integrated into the swab handle that is compatible with fully automated sample accessioning and processing. The ability to collect and release both human and viral material is comparable to that of several commonly used swabs on the market. SARS-CoV-2 is stable on dry Rhinostic swabs for at least 3 days, even at 42 °C, and elution can be achieved with small volumes. To test the performance of the Rhinostic in patients, 119 samples were collected with Rhinostic and the positive and negative determinations were 100 % concordant with samples collected using Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments (CLIA) use approved nasal swabs at a clinical lab. The Rhinostic swab and barcoded tube set can be produced, sterilized, and packaged cost effectively and is designed to be adopted by clinical laboratories using automation to increase throughput and dramatically reduce the cost of a standard SARS-CoV-2 detection pipeline.

Automated Western immunoblotting detection of anti-SARS-CoV-2 serum antibodies.

ELISA and chemiluminescence serological assays for COVID-19 are currently incorporating only one or two SARS-CoV-2 antigens. We developed an automated Western immunoblotting as a complementary serologic assay for COVID-19. The JessTM Simple Western system, an automated capillary-based assay, was used, incorporating an inactivated SARS-CoV-2 lineage 20a strain as the source of antigen, and total immunoglobulins (IgG, IgM, IgA) detection. In total, 602 sera were tested including 223 from RT-PCR-confirmed COVID-19 patients, 76 from patients diagnosed with seasonal HCoVs and 303 from coronavirus-negative control sera. We also compared this assay with the EUROIMMUN® SARS-CoV-2 IgG ELISA kit. Among 223 sera obtained from RT-PCR-confirmed COVID-19 patients, 180/223 (81%) exhibited reactivity against the nucleocapsid and 70/223 (31%) against the spike protein. Nucleocapsid reactivity was further detected in 9/76 (14%) samples collected from patients diagnosed with seasonal HCoVs and in 15/303 (5%) coronavirus-negative control samples. In the subset of sera collected more than 2 weeks after the onset of symptoms, the sensitivity was 94% and the specificity 93%, the latter value probably reflecting cross-reactivity of SARS-CoV-2 with other coronaviruses. The automated Western immunoblotting presented a substantial agreement (90%) with the compared ELISA (Cohen's Kappa=0.64). Automated Western immunoblotting may be used as a second line test to monitor exposure of people to HCoVs including SARS-CoV-2.

Evaluation of two automated low-cost RNA extraction protocols for SARS-CoV-2 detection.

BACKGROUND: Two automatable in-house protocols for high-troughput RNA extraction from nasopharyngeal swabs for SARS-CoV-2 detection have been evaluated. METHODS: One hundred forty one SARS-CoV-2 positive samples were collected during a period of 10-days. In-house protocols were based on extraction with magnetic beads and designed to be used with either the Opentrons OT-2 (OT-2in-house) liquid handling robot or the MagMAXTM Express-96 system (MMin-house). Both protocols were tested in parallel with a commercial kit that uses the MagMAXTM system (MMkit). Nucleic acid extraction efficiencies were calculated from a SARS-CoV-2 DNA positive control. RESULTS: No significant differences were found between both in-house protocols and the commercial kit in their performance to detect positive samples. The MMkit was the most efficient although the MMin-house presented, in average, lower Cts than the other two. In-house protocols allowed to save between 350€ and 400€ for every 96 extracted samples compared to the commercial kit. CONCLUSION: The protocols described harness the use of easily available reagents and an open-source liquid handling system and are suitable for SARS-CoV-2 detection in high throughput facilities.

Evaluating a novel, highly sensitive, and quantitative reagent for detecting SARS-CoV-2 antigen.

INTRODUCTION: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection is rapidly spreading all over the world. A new quantifying reagent for detecting SARS-CoV-2 antigen was developed for early and accurate detection. We evaluated the novel quantitative reagent for detecting SARS-CoV-2 antigen using an automated laboratory device. METHODS: One-hundred nasopharyngeal samples were collected from 47 SARS-CoV-2-infected patients, and 200 samples were collected from healthy donners. We measured the SARS-CoV-2 antigen and nucleic acid using Lumipulse Presto SARS-CoV-2 Ag and the 2019 Novel Coronavirus Detection Kit, respectively. RESULTS: The sensitivity and specificity of the SARS-CoV-2 antigen test were 75.7% (56/74) and 96.0% (192/200), respectively. The concordance rate in the positive group between the antigen and nucleic acid tests was 66% (66/100). In addition, the correlation coefficient between the concentration of SARS-CoV-2 antigen and the level of SARS-CoV-2 RNA was 0.74. There were 19 discrepant samples in which SARS-CoV-2 RNA was detected without SARS-CoV-2 antigen. There was significant difference between the discrepant and matched samples in terms of the time since symptom onset: the 19 discrepant samples were collected a median of 33 days after onset, while the 55 matched samples were collected a median of 19 days after onset. In addition, the 19 discrepant samples were collected from patients who were immune against SARS-CoV-2. CONCLUSIONS: This novel SARS-CoV-2 antigen detection assay is highly sensitive, rapid, accurate, easily diagnostic. It may be useful in both clinical diagnosis and in screening because it does not require special methods such as PCR.

Automated molecular testing of saliva for SARS-CoV-2 detection.

With surging global demand for SARS-CoV-2 testing capacity, laboratories seek automated, high-throughput molecular solutions, particularly for specimens not requiring specialized collection devices or viral transport media. Saliva specimens submitted from patients under investigation for COVID-19 from March to July 2020 were processed in the laboratory with sterile phosphate-buffered saline in a 1:2 dilution and tested using manual extraction and a commercial assay for detection of the SARS-CoV-2 E gene (LightMix®) in comparison to the Roche cobas® SARS-CoV-2 Test on the cobas® 6800 instrument. 34.4% (22/64) of saliva samples were positive for SARS-CoV-2. Positive and negative concordance between the LightMix® and cobas® assays were 100%. The overall invalid rate for saliva on the cobas® 6800 (1/128, 0.78%) was similar to the baseline invalid rate observed for nasopharyngeal swabs/viral transport media. Saliva is a feasible specimen type for SARS-CoV-2 testing on the cobas® 6800 platform, with potential to improve turnaround time and enhance testing capacity.

Multicenter Evaluation of the Cepheid Xpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2 Test.

Nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) are the primary means of identifying acute infections caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Accurate and fast test results may permit more efficient use of protective and isolation resources and allow rapid therapeutic interventions. We evaluated the analytical and clinical performance characteristics of the Xpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2 (Xpert) test, a rapid, automated molecular test for SARS-CoV-2. Analytical sensitivity and specificity/interference were assessed with infectious SARS-CoV-2; other infectious coronavirus species, including SARS-CoV; and 85 nasopharyngeal swab specimens positive for other respiratory viruses, including endemic human coronaviruses (hCoVs). Clinical performance was assessed using 483 remnant upper- and lower-respiratory-tract specimens previously analyzed by standard-of-care (SOC) NAATs. The limit of detection of the Xpert test was 0.01 PFU/ml. Other hCoVs, including Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus, were not detected by the Xpert test. SARS-CoV, a closely related species in the subgenus Sarbecovirus, was detected by a broad-range target (E) but was distinguished from SARS-CoV-2 (SARS-CoV-2-specific N2 target). Compared to SOC NAATs, the positive agreement of the Xpert test was 219/220 (99.5%), and the negative agreement was 250/261 (95.8%). A third tie-breaker NAAT resolved all but three of the discordant results in favor the Xpert test. The Xpert test provided sensitive and accurate detection of SARS-CoV-2 in a variety of upper- and lower-respiratory-tract specimens. The high sensitivity and short time to results of approximately 45 min may impact patient management.

Nontargeted Analysis of Face Masks: Comparison of Manual Curation to Automated GCxGC Processing Tools.

Masks constructed of a variety of materials are in widespread use due to the COVID-19 pandemic, and people are exposed to chemicals inherent in the masks through inhalation. This work aims to survey commonly available mask materials to provide an overview of potential exposure. A total of 19 mask materials were analyzed using a nontargeted analysis two-dimensional gas chromatography (GCxGC)-mass spectrometric (MS) workflow. Traditionally, there has been a lack of GCxGC-MS automated high-throughput screening methods, resulting in trade-offs with throughput and thoroughness. This work addresses the gap by introducing new machine learning software tools for high-throughput screening (Floodlight) and subsequent pattern analysis (Searchlight). A recursive workflow for chemical prioritization suitable for both manual curation and machine learning is introduced as a means of controlling the level of effort and equalizing sample loading while retaining key chemical signatures. Manual curation and machine learning were comparable with the mask materials clustering into three groups. The majority of the chemical signatures could be characterized by chemical class in seven categories: organophosphorus, long chain amides, polyethylene terephthalate oligomers, n-alkanes, olefins, branched alkanes and long-chain organic acids, alcohols, and aldehydes. The olefin, branched alkane, and organophosphorus components were primary contributors to clustering, with the other chemical classes having a significant degree of heterogeneity within the three clusters. Machine learning provided a means of rapidly extracting the key signatures of interest in agreement with the more traditional time-consuming and tedious manual curation process. Some identified signatures associated with plastics and flame retardants are potential toxins, warranting future study to understand the mask exposure route and potential health effects.

Comparison of three automatic chemiluminescent immunoassays for monitoring dynamic profile of SARS-CoV-2 IgG and IgM.

BACKGROUND: Seldom performance evaluation and diagnosis comparison studies were reported for different chemiluminescent immunoassay (CLIA) kits approved under an emergency approval program for SARS-CoV-2 infection. METHODS: A total of 100 and 105 serum separately from non-infected populations and COVID-19 patients were detected with SARS-CoV-2 IgM and IgG kits. The characteristics including precision, functional sensitivity, linearity, and accuracy were evaluated for Axceed, iFlash, and Maglumi CLIA kits. RESULTS: Maglumi and iFlash had the best analytical sensitivity for IgM and IgG, respectively. Axceed kits had a linearity response in the detected concentration. The clinical sensitivity of Axceed, iFlash, and Maglumi was 68.0%, 64.9%, and 63.9% with a specificity of 99.0%, 96.0%, and 100% for IgM, 85.6%, 97.9%, and 94.8% with a specificity of 97.0% for IgG. ROC analysis indicated all kits had a diagnostic power greater than 0.9. Notably, either IgM or IgG kits obtained a poor agreement (Kappa value from 0.397 to 0.713) with others. Among 38 recovered patients, 94.7% had an effective immune response, and both seropositive IgM and IgG accounted for the biggest proportion (medium, 42 days onset), then followed by the single seropositive IgG (medium, 50 days onset) in Ab profile. CONCLUSION: The performance of CLIA kits satisfied the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Both positive of IgG and IgM contributes to improve the specificity, and a positive one will enhance the sensitivity.