Evaluation of two automated and three rapid lateral flow immunoassays for the detection of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies.
Antibodies, Viral
/ blood
Betacoronavirus
/ immunology
COVID-19
Coronavirus Infections
/ diagnosis
Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay
/ methods
Humans
Immunoassay
/ methods
Immunoglobulin A
/ blood
Immunoglobulin G
/ blood
Pandemics
Pneumonia, Viral
/ diagnosis
Retrospective Studies
SARS-CoV-2
Sensitivity and Specificity
CLIA
COVID-19
ELISA
Immunoassays
Lateral flow assays
SARS-CoV-2
Journal
Journal of clinical virology : the official publication of the Pan American Society for Clinical Virology
ISSN: 1873-5967
Titre abrégé: J Clin Virol
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 9815671
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
07 2020
07 2020
Historique:
received:
24
04
2020
revised:
27
04
2020
accepted:
30
04
2020
pubmed:
14
5
2020
medline:
7
7
2020
entrez:
14
5
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Several SARS-CoV-2 immunoassays have been developed recently. The purpose of this study was to assess the performance of five immunoassays for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. Two quantitative automated immunoassays (Maglumi™2019-n-Cov IgG and IgM and Euroimmun Anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG and IgA assays) and three lateral flow rapid tests were performed. This retrospective study included 200 residual sera from patients and healthy volunteers. Case serum samples (n = 128) were obtained from COVID-19 patients confirmed by RT-qPCR and CT-scan. Days since onset of symptoms was collected from their medical records. Control non-SARS-CoV-2 samples (n = 72) were obtained from anonymous stored residual serum samples. Maglumi™ IgG/IgM tests showed overall less sensitivity than Euroimmun IgG/IgA test (84.4 % versus 64.3 %). Both tests showed similar specificities of IgG at 99 % and 100 %, respectively. The results from the lateral flow assays were easily interpretable with unambiguous coloured reading bands. The overall sensitivity of the three tests was similar (around 70 %) without any significant differences. The sensitivity of the three lateral flow assays and also of the serological quantitative assays increased during the second week after symptom onset and all reached similar values (91 %-94 %) after 14 days. This study shows accurate and equivalent performance of the five serological antibody assays (ELISA, CLIA and three lateral flow tests) in detecting SARS-CoV-2 antibodies 14 days after the onset of COVID-19 symptoms. This is compatible with their application in specific clinical contexts and in determining epidemiological strategies for the COVID-19 pandemic.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32403010
pii: S1386-6532(20)30155-4
doi: 10.1016/j.jcv.2020.104413
pmc: PMC7198434
pii:
doi:
Substances chimiques
Antibodies, Viral
0
Immunoglobulin A
0
Immunoglobulin G
0
Types de publication
Evaluation Study
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
104413Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2020 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Références
Clin Infect Dis. 2020 Nov 19;71(16):2027-2034
pubmed: 32221519
Rev Med Virol. 2020 May;30(3):e2106
pubmed: 32302058
Clin Chem Lab Med. 2020 Jun 25;58(7):1156-1159
pubmed: 32301750
Diagnostics (Basel). 2020 Apr 05;10(4):
pubmed: 32260471
Emerg Microbes Infect. 2020 Dec;9(1):833-836
pubmed: 32306864
J Med Virol. 2020 Oct;92(10):1795-1796
pubmed: 32311142
J Med Virol. 2020 Sep;92(9):1518-1524
pubmed: 32104917
Emerg Infect Dis. 2020 Jul;26(7):1478-1488
pubmed: 32267220
Emerg Microbes Infect. 2020 Dec;9(1):924-927
pubmed: 32286155
J Clin Microbiol. 2020 May 26;58(6):
pubmed: 32245835
Nat Med. 2020 May;26(5):643-644
pubmed: 32405055
Clin Chem Lab Med. 2020 Jun 25;58(7):1081-1088
pubmed: 32301749
J Infect. 2020 Jul;81(1):e28-e32
pubmed: 32283141
Emerg Microbes Infect. 2020 Dec;9(1):747-756
pubmed: 32196430