Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 409
Filter
Add filters

Document Type
Year range
1.
PLoS One ; 16(12): e0260894, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1623649

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Performance of the SD Biosensor saliva antigen rapid test was evaluated at a large designated testing site in non-hospitalized patients, with or without symptoms. METHOD: All eligible people over 18 years of age presenting for a booked appointment at the designated SARS-CoV-2 testing site were approached for inclusion and enrolled following verbal informed consent. One nasopharyngeal swab was taken to carry out the default antigen rapid test from which the results were reported back to the patient and one saliva sample was self-taken according to verbal instruction on site. This was used for the saliva antigen rapid test, the RT-PCR and for virus culture. Sensitivity of the saliva antigen rapid test was analyzed in two ways: i, compared to saliva RT-PCR; and ii, compared to virus culture of the saliva samples. Study participants were also asked to fill in a short questionnaire stating age, sex, date of symptom onset. Recommended time of ≥30mins since last meal, drink or cigarette if applicable was also recorded. The study was carried out in February-March 2021 for 4 weeks. RESULTS: We could include 789 people with complete records and results. Compared to saliva RT-PCR, overall sensitivity and specificity of the saliva antigen rapid test was 66.1% and 99.6% which increased to 88.6% with Ct ≤30 cutoff. Analysis by days post onset did not result in higher sensitivities because the large majority of people were in the very early phase of disease ie <3 days post onset. When breaking down the data for symptomatic and asymptomatic individuals, sensitivity ranged from 69.2% to 50% respectively, however the total number of RT-PCR positive asymptomatic participants was very low (n = 5). Importantly, almost all culture positive samples were detected by the rapid test. CONCLUSION: Overall, the potential benefits of saliva antigen rapid test, could outweigh the lower sensitivity compared to nasopharyngeal antigen rapid test in a comprehensive testing strategy, especially for home/self-testing and in vulnerable populations like elderly, disabled or children where in intrusive testing is either not possible or causes unnecessary stress.


Subject(s)
Biosensing Techniques/methods , COVID-19 Serological Testing/methods , Saliva/virology , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/etiology , Carrier State/virology , Female , Hospitalization , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Nasopharynx/virology , Sensitivity and Specificity , Young Adult
2.
PLoS One ; 16(3): e0247797, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1605332

ABSTRACT

Since the initial identification of the novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 in December of 2019, researchers have raced to understand its pathogenesis and begun devising vaccine and treatment strategies. An accurate understanding of the body's temporal immune response against SARS-CoV-2 is paramount to successful vaccine development and disease progression monitoring. To provide insight into the antibody response against SARS-CoV-2, plasma samples from 181 PCR-confirmed COVID-19 patients collected at various timepoints post-symptom onset (PSO) were tested for the presence of anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgM and IgG antibodies via lateral flow. Additionally, 21 donors were tracked over time to elucidate patient-specific immune responses. We found sustained levels of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies past 130 days PSO, with 99% positivity observed at 31-60 days PSO. By 61-90 days PSO, the percentage of IgM-/IgG+ results were nearly equal to that of IgM+/IgG+ results, demonstrating a shift in the immune response with a decrease in IgM antibody levels. Results from this study not only provide evidence that the antibody response to COVID-19 can persist for over 4 months, but also demonstrates the ability of Easy Check™ to monitor seroconversion and antibody response of patients. Easy Check was sufficiently sensitive to detect antibodies in patient samples as early as 1-4 days PSO with 86% positivity observed at 5-7 days PSO. Further studies are required to determine the longevity and efficacy of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies, and whether they are protective against re-infection.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Viral/blood , COVID-19/blood , Immunoglobulin G/blood , Immunoglobulin M/blood , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Antibodies, Viral/immunology , COVID-19/immunology , COVID-19 Serological Testing/instrumentation , COVID-19 Serological Testing/methods , Equipment Design , Female , Humans , Immunoglobulin G/immunology , Immunoglobulin M/immunology , Longitudinal Studies , Male , Middle Aged , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Young Adult
3.
J Nanobiotechnology ; 20(1): 6, 2022 Jan 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1608546

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Gold nanoparticles (AuNPs) have been widely used in local surface plasmon resonance (LSPR) immunoassays for biomolecule sensing, which is primarily based on two conventional methods: absorption spectra analysis and colorimetry. The low figure of merit (FoM) of the LSPR and high-concentration AuNP requirement restrict their limit of detection (LOD), which is approximately ng to µg mL-1 in antibody detection if there is no other signal or analyte amplification. Improvements in sensitivity have been slow in recent for a long time, and pushing the boundary of the current LOD is a great challenge of current LSPR immunoassays in biosensing. RESULTS: In this work, we developed spectral image contrast-based flow digital nanoplasmon-metry (Flow DiNM) to push the LOD boundary. Comparing the scattering image brightness of AuNPs in two neighboring wavelength bands near the LSPR peak, the peak shift signal is strongly amplified and quickly detected. Introducing digital analysis, the Flow DiNM provides an ultrahigh signal-to-noise ratio and has a lower sample volume requirement. Compared to the conventional analog LSPR immunoassay, Flow DiNM for anti-BSA detection in pure samples has an LOD as low as 1 pg mL-1 within only a 15-min detection time and 500 µL sample volume. Antibody assays against spike proteins of SARS-CoV-2 in artificial saliva that contained various proteins were also conducted to validate the detection of Flow DiNM in complicated samples. Flow DiNM shows significant discrimination in detection with an LOD of 10 pg mL-1 and a broad dynamic detection range of five orders of magnitude. CONCLUSION: Together with the quick readout time and simple operation, this work clearly demonstrated the high sensitivity and selectivity of the developed Flow DiNM in rapid antibody detection. Spectral image contrast and digital analysis further provide a new generation of LSPR immunoassay with AuNPs.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Serological Testing/methods , COVID-19/diagnosis , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Surface Plasmon Resonance/methods , Antibodies, Viral/immunology , COVID-19/immunology , COVID-19 Serological Testing/instrumentation , Equipment Design , Gold/chemistry , Humans , Immunoassay/instrumentation , Immunoassay/methods , Metal Nanoparticles/chemistry , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Saliva/virology , Spike Glycoprotein, Coronavirus/immunology , Surface Plasmon Resonance/instrumentation
4.
Lancet Infect Dis ; 21(10): 1365-1372, 2021 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1597413

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The banning of mass-gathering indoor events to prevent SARS-CoV-2 spread has had an important effect on local economies. Despite growing evidence on the suitability of antigen-detecting rapid diagnostic tests (Ag-RDT) for mass screening at the event entry, this strategy has not been assessed under controlled conditions. We aimed to assess the effectiveness of a prevention strategy during a live indoor concert. METHODS: We designed a randomised controlled open-label trial to assess the effectiveness of a comprehensive preventive intervention for a mass-gathering indoor event (a live concert) based on systematic same-day screening of attendees with Ag-RDTs, use of facial masks, and adequate air ventilation. The event took place in the Sala Apolo, Barcelona, Spain. Adults aged 18-59 years with a negative result in an Ag-RDT from a nasopharyngeal swab collected immediately before entering the event were randomised 1:1 (block randomisation stratified by age and gender) to either attend the indoor event for 5 hours or go home. Nasopharyngeal specimens used for Ag-RDT screening were analysed by real-time reverse-transcriptase PCR (RT-PCR) and cell culture (Vero E6 cells). 8 days after the event, a nasopharyngeal swab was collected and analysed by Ag-RDT, RT-PCR, and a transcription-mediated amplification test (TMA). The primary outcome was the difference in incidence of RT-PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection at 8 days between the control and the intervention groups, assessed in all participants who were randomly assigned, attended the event, and had a valid result for the SARS-CoV-2 test done at follow-up. The trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04668625. FINDINGS: Participant enrollment took place during the morning of the day of the concert, Dec 12, 2020. Of the 1140 people who responded to the call and were deemed eligible, 1047 were randomly assigned to either enter the music event (experimental group) or continue with normal life (control group). Of the 523 randomly assigned to the experimental group, 465 were included in the analysis of the primary outcome (51 did not enter the event and eight did not take part in the follow-up assessment), and of the 524 randomly assigned to the control group, 495 were included in the final analysis (29 did not take part in the follow-up). At baseline, 15 (3%) of 495 individuals in the control group and 13 (3%) of 465 in the experimental group tested positive on TMA despite a negative Ag-RDT result. The RT-PCR test was positive in one case in each group and cell viral culture was negative in all cases. 8 days after the event, two (<1%) individuals in the control arm had a positive Ag-RDT and PCR result, whereas no Ag-RDT nor RT-PCR positive results were found in the intervention arm. The Bayesian estimate for the incidence between the experimental and control groups was -0·15% (95% CI -0·72 to 0·44). INTERPRETATION: Our study provides preliminary evidence on the safety of indoor mass-gathering events during a COVID-19 outbreak under a comprehensive preventive intervention. The data could help restart cultural activities halted during COVID-19, which might have important sociocultural and economic implications. FUNDING: Primavera Sound Group and the #YoMeCorono Initiative. TRANSLATION: For the Spanish translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Serological Testing/methods , COVID-19 , Adolescent , Adult , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/epidemiology , Humans , Mass Screening , Middle Aged , Reproducibility of Results , Spain , Young Adult
5.
Sci Rep ; 11(1): 24507, 2021 12 30.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1597358

ABSTRACT

Diagnostic tests that detect antibodies (AB) against SARS-CoV-2 for evaluation of seroprevalence and guidance of health care measures are important tools for managing the COVID-19 pandemic. Current tests have certain limitations with regard to turnaround time, costs and availability, particularly in point-of-care (POC) settings. We established a hemagglutination-based AB test that is based on bi-specific proteins which contain a dromedary-derived antibody (nanobody) binding red blood cells (RBD) and a SARS-CoV-2-derived antigen, such as the receptor-binding domain of the Spike protein (Spike-RBD). While the nanobody mediates swift binding to RBC, the antigen moiety directs instantaneous, visually apparent hemagglutination in the presence of SARS-CoV-2-specific AB generated in COVID-19 patients or vaccinated individuals. Method comparison studies with assays cleared by emergency use authorization demonstrate high specificity and sensitivity. To further increase objectivity of test interpretation, we developed an image analysis tool based on digital image acquisition (via a cell phone) and a machine learning algorithm based on defined sample-training and -validation datasets. Preliminary data, including a small clinical study, provides proof of principle for test performance in a POC setting. Together, the data support the interpretation that this AB test format, which we refer to as 'NanoSpot.ai', is suitable for POC testing, can be manufactured at very low costs and, based on its generic mode of action, can likely be adapted to a variety of other pathogens.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Viral/blood , COVID-19 Serological Testing/methods , Diagnostic Tests, Routine/methods , Hemagglutination Tests/methods , Point-of-Care Testing , Spike Glycoprotein, Coronavirus/immunology , Humans , Proof of Concept Study
6.
Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis ; 102(2): 115591, 2022 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1596631

ABSTRACT

Testing for SARS-CoV-2 in resource-poor settings remains a considerable challenge. Gold standard nucleic acid tests are expensive and depend on availability of expensive equipment and highly trained laboratory staff. More affordable and easier rapid antigen tests are an attractive alternative. This study assessed field performance of such a test in western Kenya. We conducted a prospective multi-facility field evaluation study of NowCheck COVID-19 Ag-RDT compared to gold standard PCR. Two pairs of oropharyngeal and nasopharyngeal swabs were collected for comparative analysis. With 997 enrolled participants the Ag-RDT had a sensitivity 71.5% (63.2-78.6) and specificity of 97.5% (96.2-98.5) at cycle threshold value <40. Highest sensitivity of 87.7% (77.2-94.5) was observed in samples with cycle threshold values ≤30. NowCheck COVID-19 Ag-RDT performed well at multiple healthcare facilities in an African field setting. Operational specificity and sensitivity were close to WHO-recommended thresholds.


Subject(s)
Antigens, Viral/analysis , COVID-19 Serological Testing/methods , COVID-19/diagnosis , Nasopharynx/virology , Oropharynx/virology , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Adult , Child , Cross-Sectional Studies , Developing Countries , Diagnostic Tests, Routine , Female , Humans , Kenya , Male , Middle Aged , Point-of-Care Testing , Prospective Studies , Sensitivity and Specificity
7.
Microbiol Spectr ; 9(3): e0137621, 2021 12 22.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1592250

ABSTRACT

The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) emerged in December 2019 and caused a dramatic pandemic. Serological assays are used to check for immunization and assess herd immunity. We evaluated commercially available assays designed to quantify antibodies directed to the SARS-CoV-2 Spike (S) antigen, either total (Wantaï SARS-CoV-2 Ab ELISA) or IgG (SARS-CoV-2 IgG II Quant on Alinity, Abbott, and Liaison SARS-CoV-2 TrimericS IgG, Diasorin). The specificities of the Wantaï, Alinity, and Liaison assays were evaluated using 100 prepandemic sera and were 98, 99, and 97%, respectively. The sensitivities of all three were around 100% when tested on 35 samples taken 15 to 35 days postinfection. They were less sensitive for 150 sera from late infections (>180 days). Using the first WHO international standard (NIBSC), we showed that the Wantai results were concordant with the NIBSC values, while Liaison and Alinity showed a proportional bias of 1.3 and 7, respectively. The results of the 3 immunoassays were significantly globally pairwise correlated and for late infection sera (P < 0.001). They were correlated for recent infection sera measured with Alinity and Liaison (P < 0.001). However, the Wantai results of recent infections were not correlated with those from Alinity or Liaison. All the immunoassay results were significantly correlated with the neutralizing antibody titers obtained using a live virus neutralization assay with the B1.160 SARS-CoV-2 strain. These assays will be useful once the protective anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody titer has been determined. IMPORTANCE Standardization and correlation with virus neutralization assays are critical points to compare the performance of serological assays designed to quantify anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in order to identify their optimal use. We have evaluated three serological immunoassays based on the virus spike antigen that detect anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies: a microplate assay and two chemiluminescent assays performed with Alinity (Abbott) and Liaison (Diasorin) analysers. We used an in-house live virus neutralization assay and the first WHO international standard to assess the comparison. This study could be useful to determine guidelines on the use of serological results to manage vaccination and treatment with convalescent plasma or monoclonal antibodies.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Viral/blood , COVID-19 Serological Testing/methods , COVID-19/diagnosis , Immunoassay/methods , Antibodies, Neutralizing/immunology , Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay , Humans , Immunization , Immunoglobulin G/blood , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Sensitivity and Specificity , Spike Glycoprotein, Coronavirus/immunology , Vaccination
8.
Curr Med Sci ; 41(6): 1052-1064, 2021 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1588743

ABSTRACT

The ongoing Coronavirus disease 19 pandemic has likely changed the world in ways not seen in the past. Neutralizing antibody (NAb) assays play an important role in the management of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) outbreak. Using these tools, we can assess the presence and duration of antibody-mediated protection in naturally infected individuals, screen convalescent plasma preparations for donation, test the efficacy of immunotherapy, and analyze NAb titers and persistence after vaccination to predict vaccine-induced protective effects. This review briefly summarizes the various methods used for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 NAbs and compares their advantages and disadvantages to facilitate their development and clinical application.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Neutralizing/blood , Antibodies, Viral/blood , COVID-19 Serological Testing/methods , COVID-19/immunology , Neutralization Tests/methods , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19/therapy , COVID-19 Serological Testing/trends , COVID-19 Vaccines/pharmacology , Humans , Immunization, Passive , Neutralization Tests/trends , Pandemics/prevention & control
9.
Clin Immunol ; 234: 108918, 2022 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1588088

ABSTRACT

The Spike-Receptor Binding Domain (S-RBD) is considered the most antigenic protein in SARS-CoV-2 and probably the key player in SARS-CoV-2 immune response. Quantitative immunoassays may help establish an anti-RBD Abs threshold as an indication of protective immunity. Since different immunoassays are commercial, the standard reference method for the neutralizing activity is the live Virus Neutralization Test (VNT). In this study, anti-RBD IgG levels were detected with two chemiluminescent immunoassays in paucisymptomatic, symptomatic and vaccinated subjects, and their neutralizing activity was correlated to VNT titer, using SARS-CoV-2 original and British variant strains. Both immunoassays confirmed higher anti-RBD Abs levels in vaccinated subjects. Furthermore, despite different anti-RBD Abs median concentrations between the immunoassays, a strong positive correlation with VNT was observed. In conclusion, although the SARS-CoV-2 immune response heterogeneity, the use of immunoassays can help in large-scale monitoring of COVID-19 samples, becoming a valid alternative to VNT test for diagnostic routine laboratories.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Neutralizing/immunology , COVID-19 Serological Testing/methods , COVID-19/immunology , Immunoassay/methods , Neutralization Tests/methods , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Spike Glycoprotein, Coronavirus/immunology , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Animals , Antibodies, Viral/immunology , Cell Line , Chlorocebus aethiops , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Protein Binding/immunology , Vero Cells , Young Adult
10.
Bioengineered ; 13(1): 876-883, 2022 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1585254

ABSTRACT

This research has developed a method for rapid detection of SARS-CoV-2 N protein on a paper-based microfluidic chip. The chitosan-glutaraldehyde cross-linking method is used to fix the coated antibody, and the sandwich enzyme-linked immunosorbent method is used to achieve the specific detection of the target antigen. The system studied the influence of coating antibody concentration and enzyme-labeled antibody concentration on target antigen detection. According to the average gray value measured under different N protein concentrations, the standard curve of the method was established and the sensitivity was tested, and its linear regression was obtained. The equation is y = 9.8286x+137.6, R2 = 0.9772 > 0.90, which shows a high degree of fit. When the concentration of coating antibody and enzyme-labeled antibody were 1 µg/mL and 2 µg/mL, P > 0.05, the difference was not statistically significant, so the lower concentration of 1 µg/mL was chosen as the coating antibody concentration. The results show that the minimum concentration of N protein that can be detected by this method is 8 µg/mL, and the minimum concentration of coating antibody and enzyme-labeled antibody is 1 µg/mL, which has the characteristics of high sensitivity and good repeatability.


Subject(s)
Antigens, Viral/analysis , COVID-19 Serological Testing/instrumentation , Coronavirus Nucleocapsid Proteins/analysis , Coronavirus Nucleocapsid Proteins/immunology , Lab-On-A-Chip Devices , SARS-CoV-2/chemistry , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Antibodies, Viral/immunology , Biomedical Engineering , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/immunology , COVID-19/virology , COVID-19 Serological Testing/methods , COVID-19 Serological Testing/standards , Coronavirus Nucleocapsid Proteins/standards , Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay/instrumentation , Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay/methods , Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay/standards , Humans , Lab-On-A-Chip Devices/standards , Lab-On-A-Chip Devices/statistics & numerical data , Microchip Analytical Procedures/methods , Microchip Analytical Procedures/standards , Microchip Analytical Procedures/statistics & numerical data , Paper , Phosphoproteins/analysis , Phosphoproteins/immunology , Phosphoproteins/standards
11.
Emerg Microbes Infect ; 11(1): 250-259, 2022 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1585240

ABSTRACT

Testing and vaccination have been major components of the strategy for combating the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. In this study, we have developed a quantitative anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike (S1) IgG antibody assay using a fingerstick dried blood sample. We evaluated the feasibility of using this high-throughput and quantitative anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike (S1) IgG antibody testing assay in vaccinated individuals. Fingerstick blood samples were collected and analyzed from 137 volunteers before and after receiving the Moderna or Pfizer mRNA vaccine. Anti-SARS-CoV-2 S1 IgG antibody could not be detected within the first 7 days after receiving the first vaccine dose, however, the assay reliably detected antibodies from day 14 onwards. In addition, no anti-SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid (N) protein IgG antibody was detected in any of the vaccinated or healthy participants, indicating that the anti-SARS-CoV-2 S1 IgG assay is specific for the mRNA vaccine-induced antibodies. The S1 IgG levels detected in fingerstick samples correlated with the levels found in venous blood plasma samples and with the efficacy of venous blood plasma samples in the plaque reduction neutralization test (PRNT). The assay displayed a limit of quantification (LOQ) of 0.59 µg/mL and was found to be linear in the range of 0.51-1000 µg/mL. Finally, its clinical performance displayed a Positive Percent Agreement (PPA) of 100% (95% CI: 0.89-1.00) and a Negative Percent Agreement (NPA) of 100% (95% CI: 0.93-1.00). In summary, the assay described here represents a sensitive, precise, accurate, and simple method for the quantitative detection and monitoring of post-vaccination anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike IgG responses.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Serological Testing/methods , COVID-19 Vaccines/immunology , COVID-19/immunology , High-Throughput Screening Assays/methods , Immunoassay/methods , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Specimen Handling/methods , Antibodies, Viral/blood , Female , Humans , Immunoglobulin G/blood , Male , Spike Glycoprotein, Coronavirus , Vaccination
12.
Lab Med ; 52(6): e147-e153, 2021 Nov 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1574316

ABSTRACT

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.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Viral/blood , COVID-19 Serological Testing/standards , COVID-19/diagnosis , Immunoglobulin G/blood , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Automation, Laboratory , COVID-19/blood , COVID-19/immunology , COVID-19/virology , COVID-19 Serological Testing/methods , Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay/methods , Female , Humans , Male , Reagent Kits, Diagnostic , Retrospective Studies , Reverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction/methods , Sensitivity and Specificity
13.
Lab Med ; 52(6): e154-e158, 2021 Nov 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1559980

ABSTRACT

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.


Subject(s)
Antigens, Viral/genetics , COVID-19 Serological Testing/standards , COVID-19/diagnosis , Chromatography, Affinity/methods , RNA, Viral/genetics , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , Adolescent , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Automation, Laboratory , COVID-19/immunology , COVID-19/virology , COVID-19 Serological Testing/methods , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Nasopharynx/virology , Oropharynx/virology , Reagent Kits, Diagnostic , Reverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction/methods , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Sensitivity and Specificity , Viral Load/genetics
14.
J Med Virol ; 93(12): 6803-6807, 2021 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1544308

ABSTRACT

We evaluated the Panbio™ COVID-19 Ag Rapid Test Device as a point-of-care diagnostic tool for COVID-19 in 357 patients at a pediatric emergency department. Thirty-four patients tested positive by reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction, of which 24 were positive by the antigen assay. The sensitivity and specificity of the assay were 70.5% and 100%, respectively.


Subject(s)
Antigens, Viral/immunology , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/immunology , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , COVID-19 Nucleic Acid Testing/methods , COVID-19 Serological Testing/methods , Child , Child, Preschool , Emergency Service, Hospital , Female , Humans , Immunologic Tests/methods , Infant , Male , Nasopharynx/immunology , Nasopharynx/virology , Point-of-Care Testing , Prospective Studies , Sensitivity and Specificity
15.
J Med Virol ; 93(12): 6544-6550, 2021 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1544302

ABSTRACT

We developed a rapid and simple magnetic chemiluminescence enzyme immunoassay on the Real Express-6 analyzer, which could simultaneously detect immunoglobulin G and immunoglobulin M antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 virus in human blood within 18 min, and which could be used to detect clinical studies to verify its clinical efficacy. We selected blood samples from 185 COVID-19 patients confirmed by polymerase chain reaction and 271 negative patients to determine the clinical detection sensitivity, specificity, stability, and precision of this method. Meanwhile, we also surveyed the dynamic variance of viral antibodies during SARS-CoV-2 infection. This rapid immunoassay test has huge potential benefits for rapid screening of SARS-CoV-2 infection and may help clinical drug and vaccine development.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Viral/blood , COVID-19 Serological Testing/methods , COVID-19/diagnosis , Immunoglobulin G/blood , Immunoglobulin M/blood , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Cross Reactions/immunology , Early Diagnosis , Female , Humans , Immunoassay/methods , Luminescent Measurements , Male , Mass Screening/methods , Middle Aged , Polymerase Chain Reaction , Sensitivity and Specificity , Young Adult
16.
J Med Virol ; 93(12): 6512-6518, 2021 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1544296

ABSTRACT

There is a great demand for more rapid tests for SARS-CoV-2 detection to reduce waiting time, boost public health strategies for combating disease, decrease costs, and prevent overwhelming laboratory capacities. This study was conducted to assess the performance of 10 lateral flow device viral antigen immunoassays for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 in nasopharyngeal swab specimens. We analyzed 231 nasopharyngeal samples collected from October 2020 to December 2020, from suspected COVID-19 cases and contacts of positive cases at Biotechnology Research Center laboratories, Tripoli, Libya. The performance of 10 COVID-19 Antigen (Ag) rapid test devices for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 antigen was compared to a quantitative reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR). In this study, 161 cases had symptoms consistent with COVID-19. The mean duration from symptom onset was 6.6 ± 4.3 days. The median cycle threshold (Ct ) of positive samples was 25. Among the 108 positive samples detected by RT-qPCR, the COVID-19 antigen (Ag) tests detected 83 cases correctly. All rapid Ag test devices used in this study showed 100% specificity. While tests from six manufacturers had an overall sensitivity range from 75% to 100%, the remaining four tests had a sensitivity of 50%-71.43%. Sensitivity during the first 6 days of symptoms and in samples with high viral loads (Ct < 25), was 100% in all but two of the test platforms. False-negative samples had a median Ct of 34 and an average duration of onset of symptoms of 11.3 days (range = 5-20 days). Antigen test diagnosis has high sensitivity and specificity in early disease when patients present less than 7 days of symptom onset. Patients are encouraged to test as soon as they get COVID-19-related symptoms within 1 week and to seek medical advice within 24 h if they develop disturbed smell/taste. The use of rapid antigen tests is important for controlling the COVID-19 pandemic and reducing the burden on molecular diagnostic laboratories.


Subject(s)
Antigens, Viral/analysis , COVID-19 Serological Testing/methods , COVID-19/diagnosis , Immunoassay/methods , Adult , COVID-19 Serological Testing/economics , False Negative Reactions , Female , Humans , Immunoassay/economics , Male , Nasopharynx/virology , Prospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Sensitivity and Specificity , Time Factors , Viral Load
17.
J Med Virol ; 93(12): 6778-6781, 2021 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1544295

ABSTRACT

A high-throughput, fully automated antigen detection test for SARS-CoV-2 is a viable alternative to reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR) for mass screening during outbreaks. In this study, we compared RT-qPCR for viral load and the VITROS® SARS-CoV-2 Antigen Test with reference to the results of the LUMIPULSE® SARS-CoV-2 Ag Test. Of 128 nasopharyngeal swab specimens taken from patients suspected of being infected with SARS-CoV-2, 49 were positive and 79 were negative according to RT-qPCR. Consistent dose-dependent detection with VITROS® assay was successfully achieved when using nasopharyngeal swab specimens with Ct values of 32.0 or lesser, whereas the CLEIA-based LUMIPULSE® assay was able to detect lower viral loads compared with the VITROS® assay. Our results show that the performance of the VITROS® assay was satisfactory for the diagnosis of contagious COVID-19 patients in the clinical setting. Highlights The performance of the VITROS® SARS-CoV-2 Antigen Test was sufficient for the diagnosis of contagious COVID-19. This test showed high sensitivity and specificity in the detection of SARS-CoV-2 in samples with a Ct value of 32 or less.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Serological Testing/methods , COVID-19 Testing/methods , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/immunology , Immunoenzyme Techniques/methods , Immunologic Tests/methods , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Antigens, Viral/genetics , Antigens, Viral/immunology , COVID-19/virology , Humans , Mass Screening/methods , Nasopharynx/immunology , Nasopharynx/virology , RNA, Viral/genetics , RNA, Viral/immunology , Real-Time Polymerase Chain Reaction/methods , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , Sensitivity and Specificity , Viral Load/genetics , Viral Load/immunology
19.
Clin Microbiol Rev ; 34(3)2021 06 16.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1501523

ABSTRACT

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, caused by severe acute respiratory disease coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), has led to millions of confirmed cases and deaths worldwide. Efficient diagnostic tools are in high demand, as rapid and large-scale testing plays a pivotal role in patient management and decelerating disease spread. This paper reviews current technologies used to detect SARS-CoV-2 in clinical laboratories as well as advances made for molecular, antigen-based, and immunological point-of-care testing, including recent developments in sensor and biosensor devices. The importance of the timing and type of specimen collection is discussed, along with factors such as disease prevalence, setting, and methods. Details of the mechanisms of action of the various methodologies are presented, along with their application span and known performance characteristics. Diagnostic imaging techniques and biomarkers are also covered, with an emphasis on their use for assessing COVID-19 or monitoring disease severity or complications. While the SARS-CoV-2 literature is rapidly evolving, this review highlights topics of interest that have occurred during the pandemic and the lessons learned throughout. Exploring a broad armamentarium of techniques for detecting SARS-CoV-2 will ensure continued diagnostic support for clinicians, public health, and infection prevention and control for this pandemic and provide advice for future pandemic preparedness.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Nucleic Acid Testing/methods , COVID-19 Serological Testing/methods , COVID-19/diagnostic imaging , COVID-19/diagnosis , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , Biosensing Techniques , Genome, Viral/genetics , Humans , Nucleic Acid Amplification Techniques/methods , Point-of-Care Testing , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Specimen Handling/methods
20.
Microbiol Spectr ; 9(2): e0105921, 2021 10 31.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1495012

ABSTRACT

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) emerged in late 2019 and has since caused a global pandemic resulting in millions of cases and deaths. Diagnostic tools and serological assays are critical for controlling the outbreak, especially assays designed to quantitate neutralizing antibody levels, considered the best correlate of protection. As vaccines become increasingly available, it is important to identify reliable methods for measuring neutralizing antibody responses that correlate with authentic virus neutralization but can be performed outside biosafety level 3 (BSL3) laboratories. While many neutralizing assays using pseudotyped virus have been developed, there have been few studies comparing the different assays to each other as surrogates for authentic virus neutralization. Here, we characterized three enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISAs) and three pseudotyped vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV) neutralization assays and assessed their concordance with authentic virus neutralization. The most accurate assays for predicting authentic virus neutralization were luciferase- and secreted embryonic alkaline phosphatase (SEAP)-expressing pseudotyped virus neutralizations, followed by green fluorescent protein (GFP)-expressing pseudotyped virus neutralization, and then the ELISAs. IMPORTANCE The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic is caused by infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Prior infection or vaccination can be detected by the presence of antibodies in the blood. Antibodies in the blood are also considered to be protective against future infections from the same virus. The "gold standard" assay for detecting protective antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 is neutralization of authentic SARS-CoV-2 virus. However, this assay can only be performed under highly restrictive biocontainment conditions. We therefore characterized six antibody-detecting assays for their correlation with authentic virus neutralization. The significance of our research is in outlining the advantages and disadvantages of the different assays and identifying the optimal surrogate assay for authentic virus neutralization. This will allow for more accurate assessments of protective immunity against SARS-CoV-2 following infection and vaccination.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Neutralizing/blood , Antibodies, Viral/blood , COVID-19 Serological Testing/methods , COVID-19/diagnosis , Neutralization Tests/methods , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Adult , Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay/methods , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Protein Domains/immunology , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Spike Glycoprotein, Coronavirus/immunology , Vesicular stomatitis Indiana virus/immunology , Vesicular stomatitis New Jersey virus/immunology
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...