Understanding Antibody Testing for COVID-19.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Jacofsky D
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7184973 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:Purpose: This study aims to characterize the early innate and adaptive responses induced by SARS-CoV-2 infection in children and adults over time up to 8 weeks post symptoms onset (POS). We report the gene signature of COVID-19 over the course of the disease in both age groups. The kinetic of infection was divided in 5-time intervals according to the calculated days POS: interval 1 (0-5), interval 2 (6-14), interval 3 (15-22), interval 4 (23-35), and interval 5 (36-81). Methods: RNA extraction was performed automatically via the PAXgene Blood miRNA Kit and the QIAcube instrument (Qiagen) following the manufacturer’s protocol. RNA concentration and quality were assessed by using the Qubit instrument (Invitrogen) and the Agilent 2100 Bioanalyzer, respectively. The Stranded Total RNA Ribo-Zero Plus kit from Illumina was used for the library preparation with 100 ng of total RNA as input. Library molarity and quality were assessed with the Qubit and Tapestation using a DNA High sensitivity chip (Agilent Technologies). Libraries were pooled at 2 nM for clustering and sequenced on an Illumina HiSeq 4000 sequencer for a minimum of 30 million single-end 100 reads per sample. Main results: (I) we observed an antiviral-IFN-signature and innate-cell-activation within the first 5 days post symptoms onset (POS), while genes associated with CD4 T-cell responses, plasma cells and immunoglobulin were upregulated in both age groups during the first two weeks POS, indicative of SARS-CoV-2-specific adaptive immune responses; (II) in adults, genes associated with IFN antiviral responses and activated dendritic cells were maintained during the second week of disease, and subsided only after 14 days. By contrast, those transcriptome changes subsided already after 5 days in children.
2021-09-22 | GSE166190 | GEO
Project description:BackgroundDuring the COVID-19 pandemic, antibody testing was proposed by several countries as a surveillance tool to monitor the spread of the virus and potentially to ease restrictions. In the UK, antibody testing originally formed the third pillar of the UK Government's COVID-19 testing programme and was thought to offer hope that those with a positive antibody test result could return to normal life. However, at that time scientists and the public had little understanding of the longevity of COVID-19 antibodies, and whether they provided immunity to reinfection or transmission of the virus.ObjectiveThis paper explores the UK public's understanding of COVID-19 testing, perceived test accuracy, the meaning of a positive test result, willingness to adhere to restrictive measures in response to an antibody test result and how they expect other people to respond.MethodsOn-line synchronous focus groups were conducted in April/May 2020 during the first wave of the pandemic and the most stringent period of the COVID-19 restrictive measures. Data were analysed thematically.ResultsThere was confusion in responses as to whether those with a positive or negative test should return to work and which restrictive measures would apply to them or their household members. Participants raised concerns about the wider public response to positive antibody test results and the adverse behavioural effects. There were worries that antibody tests could create a divided society particularly if those with a positive test result were given greater freedoms or chose to disregard the restrictive measures.ConclusionShould these tests be offered more widely, information should be developed in consultation with the public to ensure clarity and address uncertainty about test results and subsequent behaviours.
| S-EPMC7884253 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background: The COVID-19 pandemic caused >1 million infections during January-March 2020. There is an urgent need for reliable antibody detection approaches to support diagnosis, vaccine development, safe release of individuals from quarantine, and population lock-down exit strategies. We set out to evaluate the performance of ELISA and lateral flow immunoassay (LFIA) devices. Methods: We tested plasma for COVID (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2; SARS-CoV-2) IgM and IgG antibodies by ELISA and using nine different LFIA devices. We used a panel of plasma samples from individuals who have had confirmed COVID infection based on a PCR result (n=40), and pre-pandemic negative control samples banked in the UK prior to December-2019 (n=142). Results: ELISA detected IgM or IgG in 34/40 individuals with a confirmed history of COVID infection (sensitivity 85%, 95%CI 70-94%), vs. 0/50 pre-pandemic controls (specificity 100% [95%CI 93-100%]). IgG levels were detected in 31/31 COVID-positive individuals tested ≥10 days after symptom onset (sensitivity 100%, 95%CI 89-100%). IgG titres rose during the 3 weeks post symptom onset and began to fall by 8 weeks, but remained above the detection threshold. Point estimates for the sensitivity of LFIA devices ranged from 55-70% versus RT-PCR and 65-85% versus ELISA, with specificity 95-100% and 93-100% respectively. Within the limits of the study size, the performance of most LFIA devices was similar. Conclusions: Currently available commercial LFIA devices do not perform sufficiently well for individual patient applications. However, ELISA can be calibrated to be specific for detecting and quantifying SARS-CoV-2 IgM and IgG and is highly sensitive for IgG from 10 days following first symptoms.
| S-EPMC7941096 | biostudies-literature
Project description:To detect the presence of antibodies in blood against SARS-CoV-2 in a highly sensitive and specific manner, here we describe a robust, inexpensive ($200), 3D-printable portable imaging platform (TinyArray imager) that can be deployed immediately in areas with minimal infrastructure to read coronavirus antigen microarrays (CoVAMs) that contain a panel of antigens from SARS-CoV-2, SARS-1, MERS, and other respiratory viruses. Application includes basic laboratories and makeshift field clinics where a few drops of blood from a finger prick could be rapidly tested in parallel for the presence of antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 with a test turnaround time of only 2-4 h. To evaluate our imaging device, we probed and imaged coronavirus microarrays with COVID-19-positive and negative sera and achieved a performance on par with a commercial microarray reader 100× more expensive than our imaging device. This work will enable large scale serosurveillance, which can play an important role in the months and years to come to implement efficient containment and mitigation measures, as well as help develop therapeutics and vaccines to treat and prevent the spread of COVID-19.
| S-EPMC8462184 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic due to infection by a new human coronavirus, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), has seriously disrupted the provision of oncology services and their uptake. Antibody testing, both at an individual level and of populations, has been widely viewed to be a key activity for guiding the options for treatment of high-risk individuals, as well as the implementation of safe control of infection measures. Ideally, the detection of a specific antibody should signify that all individuals tested have been infected by SARS-CoV-2 and that in the case of specific IgG that they are immune to further infection. This would enable SARS-CoV-2-infected individuals to be appropriately managed and healthcare workers shown to be immune to return to work where they would no longer pose a risk to their patients or be at risk themselves. Unfortunately, this is not the case for COVID-19, where it has been shown that immunity may not be protective, and seroconversion delayed or absent. The variability in antibody test performance, particularly that of lateral flow assays, has caused confusion for the public and healthcare professions alike. Many antibody test devices have been made available without independent evaluations and these may lack both adequate sensitivity and specificity. This review seeks to educate healthcare workers, particularly those working in oncology, of the current benefits and limitations of SARS-CoV-2 antibody testing.
| S-EPMC7553121 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The COVID-19 pandemic revealed an urgent need for rapid profiling of neutralizing antibody responses and development of antibody therapeutics. The current Food and Drug Administration-approved serological tests do not measure antibody-mediated viral neutralization, and there is a need for standardized quantitative neutralization assays. We report a high-throughput two-step profiling approach for identifying neutralizing convalescent plasma. Screening and downselection for serum antibody binding to the receptor-binding domain are followed by quantitative neutralization testing using a chimeric vesicular stomatitis virus expressing spike protein of SARS-CoV-2 in a real-time cell analysis assay. This approach enables a predictive screening process for identifying plasma units that neutralize SARS-CoV-2. To calibrate antibody neutralizing activity in serum from convalescent plasma donors, we introduce a neutralizing antibody standard reagent composed of two human antibodies that neutralize SARS-CoV strains, including SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern. Our results provide a framework for establishing a standardized assessment of antibody-based interventions against COVID-19.
| S-EPMC8653399 | biostudies-literature
Project description:(1) Background: There is a paucity of data regarding the validity of rapid antibody testing for SARS-CoV-2 vaccine response in homeless people worldwide. The objective of this study was to evaluate a rapid SARS-CoV-2 IgM/IgG antibody detection kit as a qualitative screen for vaccination in homeless people. (2) Methods: This study included 430 homeless people and 120 facility workers who had received one of BNT162b2, mRNA-1273, AZD1222/ChAdOx1, or JNJ-78436735/AD26.COV2.5 vaccines. They were tested for IgM/IgG antibodies to the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein with the STANDARD™ Q COVID-19 IgM/IgG Plus Test (QNCOV-02C). ELISA/competitive inhibition ELISA (CI-ELISA) was subsequently run to assess the validity of the serological antibody test. (3) Results: The sensitivity of homeless people was 43.5%. The status of homelessness was related to a lower agreement between serological antibody testing and CI-ELISA (adjusted OR (aOR), 0.35; 95% CI, 0.18-0.70). However, the Heterologous boost vaccine presented higher agreement between serological antibody testing and CI-ELISA (adjusted OR (aOR), 6.50; 95% CI, 3.19-13.27). (4) Conclusions: This study found weak agreement between the rapid IgG results and confirmatory CI-ELISA testing in homeless people. However, it can be used as a screening test for the acceptance of homeless people with heterologous boost vaccination in facilities.
| S-EPMC10305635 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Understanding COVID-19 in children and adults
| PRJNA699562 | ENA
Project description:The use of cell lines derived from elective abortions in the development and production of COVID vaccines was opposed by the Catholic church who encouraged pharmaceutical companies and governmental health agencies to produce and distribute ethical vaccines that do not create problems of conscience for healthcare providers or those requiring vaccination. In response to the church’s call for ethical alternatives in research and development of COVID vaccines, we present an approach for the measurement of Anti–SARS-CoV-2 Ig antibodies in blood plasma (COVID-19 Antibody test) that does not utilize any products produced in aborted fetal cell lines. The SARS-CoV-2 RBD protein used in this test was produced in Chinese Hamster Ovary (CHO) cells and test performance for determination of SARS-CoV-2 seroconversion was equivalent to a commercially available COVID-19 antibody test that utilized RBD protein and other reagents produced in embryonic cell lines.
| S-EPMC9149657 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo assess the value of using SARS-CoV-2 specific antibody testing to prioritize the vaccination of susceptible individuals as part of a COVID-19 vaccine distribution plan when vaccine supply is limited.MethodsAn extended susceptible-infected-recovered (SIR) compartmental model was used to simulate COVID-19 spread when considering diagnosis, isolation, and vaccination of a cohort of 1 million individuals. The scenarios modeled represented 4 pandemic severity scenarios and various times when the vaccine becomes available during the pandemic. Eligible individuals have a probability p of receiving antibody testing prior to vaccination (p = 0, 0.25, 0.5, 0.75, and 1). The vaccine was modeled as a single dose vaccine with 90% and 70% efficacy. The value of serology testing was evaluated by comparing the infection attack rate, peak infections, peak day, and deaths.ResultsThe use of antibody testing to prioritize the allocation of limited vaccines reduces infection attack rates and deaths. The size of the reduction depends on when the vaccine becomes available relative to the infection peak day. The largest percentage reduction in cases and deaths occurs when the vaccine is deployed before and close to the infection peak day. The reduction in the number of cases and deaths diminishes as vaccine deployment is delayed.ConclusionsAntibody testing as part of the vaccination plan is an effective method to maximize the benefit of a COVID-19 vaccine. Decision-makers need to consider relative timing between the infection peak day and when the vaccine becomes available.
| S-EPMC8233959 | biostudies-literature