Application of newly developed SARS-CoV2 serology test along with real-time PCR for early detection in health care workers and on-time plasma donation.
ELISA
ELISA, Enzyme Linked Immune-Sorbent Assay
IgG
IgM
N, nucleocapsid protein
Nucleocapsid protein
PCR, polymerase chain reaction
RBD, receptor binding domain
Receptor binding domain
S, spike protein
SARS-CoV-2, Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome caused by Coronavirus-2
SARS-CoV2
Spike protein
Journal
Gene reports
ISSN: 2452-0144
Titre abrégé: Gene Rep
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101680713
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Jun 2021
Jun 2021
Historique:
received:
16
01
2021
accepted:
06
04
2021
entrez:
19
4
2021
pubmed:
20
4
2021
medline:
20
4
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
As the daily number of coronavirus infection disease 19 (COVID19) patients increases, the necessity of early diagnosis becomes more obvious. In this respect, we aimed to develop a serological test for specifically detecting anti-SARS-CoV2 antibodies. We collected serum and saliva samples from 609 individuals who work at TBZMED affiliated hospitals in Tabriz, Iran, from April to June of 2020. Real-time PCR technique was used to detect SARS-CoV-2 genome using specific primers. An enzyme linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) test was designed based on virus nucleocapsid (N), spike (S) and its receptor binding domain (RBD) protein, and the collected sera were subjected to IgM and/or IgG analysis. Real-time PCR results showed that 66 people were infected with the SARS-CoV-2. Our designed ELISA kit showed 93.75% and 98% of sensitivity and specificity, respectively. In this study, 5.74% of participants had specific IgG against RBD, whereas the percentage for IgM positive individuals was 5.58%. Approximately the same results were observed for S protein. The number of positive participants for NP increased further, and the results of this antigen showed 7.38% for IgG and 7.06% for IgM. The ELISA test beside real-time PCR could provide a reliable serologic profile for the status of the disease progress and early detection of individuals. More importantly, it possesses the potential to identify the best candidates for plasma donation according to the antibody titers.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
As the daily number of coronavirus infection disease 19 (COVID19) patients increases, the necessity of early diagnosis becomes more obvious. In this respect, we aimed to develop a serological test for specifically detecting anti-SARS-CoV2 antibodies.
METHODS
METHODS
We collected serum and saliva samples from 609 individuals who work at TBZMED affiliated hospitals in Tabriz, Iran, from April to June of 2020. Real-time PCR technique was used to detect SARS-CoV-2 genome using specific primers. An enzyme linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) test was designed based on virus nucleocapsid (N), spike (S) and its receptor binding domain (RBD) protein, and the collected sera were subjected to IgM and/or IgG analysis.
RESULT
RESULTS
Real-time PCR results showed that 66 people were infected with the SARS-CoV-2. Our designed ELISA kit showed 93.75% and 98% of sensitivity and specificity, respectively. In this study, 5.74% of participants had specific IgG against RBD, whereas the percentage for IgM positive individuals was 5.58%. Approximately the same results were observed for S protein. The number of positive participants for NP increased further, and the results of this antigen showed 7.38% for IgG and 7.06% for IgM.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
The ELISA test beside real-time PCR could provide a reliable serologic profile for the status of the disease progress and early detection of individuals. More importantly, it possesses the potential to identify the best candidates for plasma donation according to the antibody titers.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33869895
doi: 10.1016/j.genrep.2021.101140
pii: S2452-0144(21)00125-4
pmc: PMC8041740
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
101140Informations de copyright
© 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors declare no conflict of interests.
Références
Exp Neurobiol. 2020 Apr 30;29(2):107-119
pubmed: 32156101
Mem Inst Oswaldo Cruz. 2016 Jul 4;111(8):501-4
pubmed: 27384081
Cell. 2020 Oct 1;183(1):158-168.e14
pubmed: 32979941
J Med Virol. 2020 Oct;92(10):1735-1738
pubmed: 32243608
Nat Med. 2020 Jun;26(6):845-848
pubmed: 32350462
Clin Diagn Lab Immunol. 2004 Jan;11(1):219-21
pubmed: 14715572
Nat Microbiol. 2020 Apr;5(4):562-569
pubmed: 32094589
Lancet. 2020 Feb 15;395(10223):497-506
pubmed: 31986264
Clin Diagn Lab Immunol. 2005 Nov;12(11):1317-21
pubmed: 16275947
J Virol. 2003 Mar;77(5):2922-7
pubmed: 12584316
Infez Med. 2020 Ahead of print Jun 1;28(2):153-165
pubmed: 32275257
J Immunol. 2008 Nov 1;181(9):6337-48
pubmed: 18941225
Clin Infect Dis. 2020 Nov 19;71(16):2027-2034
pubmed: 32221519
J Virol. 2015 Sep;89(17):9029-43
pubmed: 26085159
Microb Pathog. 2020 Sep;146:104241
pubmed: 32387389
J Clin Microbiol. 2003 Oct;41(10):4521-4
pubmed: 14532176
Nat Med. 2020 Jul;26(7):1033-1036
pubmed: 32398876
Infez Med. 2020 Ahead of print Jun 1;28(2):185-191
pubmed: 32275260
Cell. 2020 Apr 16;181(2):281-292.e6
pubmed: 32155444
Nat Rev Microbiol. 2009 Mar;7(3):226-36
pubmed: 19198616
Sci Transl Med. 2021 Jan 20;13(577):
pubmed: 33288662
Clin Chim Acta. 2020 Oct;509:288-292
pubmed: 32569631
Immunol Invest. 2020 Jul 21;:1-3
pubmed: 32689852
Microbes Infect. 2020 May - Jun;22(4-5):206-211
pubmed: 32425648