Clinical application of rapid diagnostic test kit for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies into the field of patient care.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Ko JH
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7348590 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Feb
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Clinical application of rapid diagnostic test kit for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies into the field of patient care.
Ko Jae-Hoon JH Joo Eun-Jeong EJ Kim Sung-Han SH Kim Yae-Jean YJ Huh Kyungmin K Cho Sun Young SY Kang Cheol-In CI Chung Doo Ryeon DR Kang Eun-Suk ES Peck Kyong Ran KR
Journal of microbiology, immunology, and infection = Wei mian yu gan ran za zhi 20200710 1
Clinical applicability of rapid diagnostic test kit for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies was evaluated. The kit detected antibodies from day 9-56 of illness. IgG bands were observed up to 1: 1000 dilutions. The kit could detect 90.5% of IgG and 61.9% of IgM antibodies of mild febrile patients without pneumonia. ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundViral RNA amplification by real-time RT-PCR still represents the gold standard for the detection of SARS-CoV-2, but the development of rapid, reliable and easy-to-perform diagnostic methods is crucial for public health, because of the need of shortening the time of result-reporting with a cost-efficient approach.ObjectivesThe aim of our research was to assess the performance of FREND™ COVID-19 Ag assay (NanoEntek, South Korea) as a ultra-rapid frontline test for SARS-CoV-2 identification, in comparison with RT-PCR and another COVID-19 antigen fluorescence immunoassay (FIA).Study designThe qualitative FIA FREND™ test, designed to detect within 3 min the Nucleocapsid protein of SARS-CoV-2, was evaluated using nasopharyngeal swabs in Universal Transport Medium (UTM™, Copan Diagnostics Inc, US) from suspected COVID-19 cases who accessed the Emergency Room of the Ospedale Policlinico San Martino, Genoa, Liguria, Northwest Italy. Diagnostic accuracy was determined in comparison with SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR and STANDARD F™ COVID-19 Ag FIA test (SD BIOSENSOR Inc., Republic of Korea).ResultsIn November 2020, 110 nasopharyngeal samples were collected consecutively; 60 resulted RT-PCR positive. With respect to RT-PCR results, sensitivity and specificity of FREND™ COVID-19 Ag test were 93.3 % (95 % CI: 83.8-98.2) and 100 % (95 % CI: 92.9-100), respectively. FREND™and STANDARD F™ COVID-19 Ag FIA assays showed a concordance of 96.4 % (Cohen's k = 0.93, 95 % CI: 0.86-0.99).ConclusionsFREND™ FIA test showed high sensitivity and specificity in nasopharyngeal swabs. The assay has the potential to become an important tool for an ultra-rapid identification of SARS-CoV-2 infection, particularly in situations with limited access to molecular diagnostics.
| S-EPMC8161776 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundConsidering the possibility of nasal self-sampling and the ease of use in performing SARS-CoV-2 antigen-detecting rapid diagnostic tests (Ag-RDTs), self-testing is a feasible option.ObjectiveThe goal of this study was a head-to-head comparison of diagnostic accuracy of patient self-testing with professional testing using a SARS-CoV-2 Ag-RDT.Study designWe performed a manufacturer-independent, prospective diagnostic accuracy study of nasal mid-turbinate self-sampling and self-testing with symptomatic adults using a WHO-listed SARS-CoV-2 Ag-RDT. Procedures were observed without intervention. For comparison, Ag-RDTs with nasopharyngeal sampling were professionally performed. Estimates of agreement, sensitivity, and specificity relative to RT-PCR on a combined oro-/nasopharyngeal sample were calculated. Feasibility was evaluated by observer and participant questionnaires.ResultsAmong 146 symptomatic adults, 40 (27.4%) were RT-PCR-positive for SARS-CoV-2. Sensitivity with self-testing was 82.5% (33/40; 95% CI 68.1-91.3), and 85.0% (34/40; 95% CI 70.9-92.9) with professional testing. At high viral load (≥7.0 log10 SARS-CoV-2 RNA copies/ml), sensitivity was 96.6% (28/29; 95% CI 82.8-99.8) for both self- and professional testing. Deviations in sampling and testing were observed in 25 out of the 40 PCR-positives. Most participants (80.9%) considered the Ag-RDT as easy to perform.ConclusionLaypersons suspected for SARS-CoV-2 infection were able to reliably perform the Ag-RDT and test themselves. Procedural errors might be reduced by refinement of the instructions for use or the product design/procedures. Self-testing allows more wide-spread and frequent testing. Paired with the appropriate information of the public about the benefits and risks, self-testing may have significant impact on the pandemic.
| S-EPMC8163726 | biostudies-literature
Project description:To safely re-open economies and prevent future outbreaks, rapid, frequent, point-of-need, SARS-CoV-2 diagnostic testing is necessary. However, existing field-deployable COVID-19 testing methods require the use of uncomfortable swabs and trained providers in PPE, while saliva-based methods must be transported to high complexity laboratories for testing. Here, we report the development and clinical validation of High-Performance Loop-mediated isothermal Amplification (HP-LAMP), a rapid, saliva-based, SARS-CoV-2 test with a limit of detection of 1.4 copies of virus per µl of saliva and a sensitivity and specificity with clinical samples of > 96%, on par with traditional RT-PCR based methods using swabs, but can deliver results using only a single fluid transfer step and simple heat block. Testing of 120 patient samples in 40 pools comprised of 5 patient samples each with either all negative or a single positive patient sample was 100% accurate. Thus, HP-LAMP may enable rapid and accurate results in the field using saliva, without need of a high-complexity laboratory.
| S-EPMC7943555 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesThere is a high demand for SARS-CoV-2 testing to identify COVID-19 cases. Real-time quantitative PCR (qRT-PCR) is the recommended diagnostic test but a number of constraints prevent its widespread implementation, including cost. The aim of this study was to evaluate a low cost and easy to use rapid antigen test for diagnosing COVID-19 at the point of care.MethodsNasopharyngeal swabs from suspected COVID-19 cases and low-risk volunteers were tested with the STANDARD Q COVID-19 Ag Test and the results were compared with the qRT-PCR results.ResultsIn total, 262 samples were collected, including 90 qRT-PCR positives. The majority of samples were from males (89%) with a mean age of 34 years and only 13 (14%) of the positives were mildly symptomatic. The sensitivity and specificity of the antigen test were 70.0% (95% confidence interval (CI): 60-79) and 92% (95% CI: 87-96), respectively, and the diagnostic accuracy was 84% (95% CI: 79-88). The antigen test was more likely to be positive for samples with qRT-PCR Ct values ≤29, with a sensitivity of 92%.ConclusionsThe STANDARD Q COVID-19 Ag Test performed less than optimally in this evaluation. However, the test may still have an important role to play early in infection when timely access to molecular testing is not available but the results should be confirmed by qRT-PCR.
| S-EPMC7836828 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Serological detection of antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 is essential for establishing rates of seroconversion in populations, and for seeking evidence for a level of antibody that may be protective against COVID-19 disease. Several high-performance commercial tests have been described, but these require centralised laboratory facilities that are comparatively expensive, and therefore not available universally. Red cell agglutination tests do not require special equipment, are read by eye, have short development times, low cost and can be applied at the Point of Care. Here we describe a quantitative Haemagglutination test (HAT) for the detection of antibodies to the receptor binding domain of the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein. The HAT has a sensitivity of 90% and specificity of 99% for detection of antibodies after a PCR diagnosed infection. We will supply aliquots of the test reagent sufficient for ten thousand test wells free of charge to qualified research groups anywhere in the world.
| S-EPMC8007702 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundIn response to the SARS-CoV-2 epidemic, a convenient, rapid, and sensitive diagnostic method for detecting COVID-19 is crucial for patient control and timely treatment.ObjectiveThis study aimed to validate the detection of SARS-CoV-2 with the Pluslife SARS-CoV-2 rapid test kit developed based on a novel thermostatic amplification technique called RNase hybridization-assisted amplification.MethodsFrom November 25 to December 8, 2022, patients with suspected or confirmed COVID-19, close contacts, and health care workers at high risk of exposure were recruited from 3 hospitals and 1 university. Respiratory specimens were collected for testing with the Pluslife SARS-CoV-2 rapid test kit and compared with reverse transcription-quantitative polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR) and a commercial antigen assay kit. Samples from 1447 cases were obtained from 3 "ready-to-test" scenarios in which samples were collected on site and tested immediately, and samples from 503 cases were obtained from a "freeze-thaw test" scenario in which samples were collected, frozen, and thawed for testing.ResultsPluslife SARS-CoV-2 rapid testing of samples from the "ready-to-test" scenario was found to be accurate (overall sensitivity and specificity of 98.3% and 99.3%, respectively) and diagnostically useful (positive and negative likelihood ratios of 145.45 and 0.02, respectively). Pluslife SARS-CoV-2 rapid testing of samples from the "freeze-thaw test" scenario was also found to be accurate (overall sensitivity and specificity of 71.2% and 98.6%, respectively) and diagnostically useful (positive and negative likelihood ratios of 51.01 and 0.67, respectively). Our findings demonstrated that the time efficiency and accuracy of the results in a "ready-to-test" scenario were better. The time required from sample preparation to the seeing the result of the Pluslife SARS-CoV-2 rapid test was 10 to 38 minutes, which was substantially shorter than that of RT-qPCR (at least 90 minutes). In addition, the diagnostic efficacy of the Pluslife SARS-CoV-2 rapid test was better than that of a commercial antigen assay kit.ConclusionsThe developed RNase hybridization-assisted amplification assay provided rapid, sensitive, and convenient detection of SARS-CoV-2 infection and may be useful for enhanced detection of COVID-19 in homes, high-risk industries, and hospitals.
| S-EPMC10650960 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is the causative agent of COVID-19 disease. RT-qPCR has been the primary method of diagnosis; however, the required infrastructure is lacking in many developing countries and the virus has remained a global challenge. More inexpensive and immediate test methods are required to facilitate local, regional, and national management strategies to re-open world economies. Here we have developed a SARS-CoV-2 antigen test in an inexpensive lateral flow format to generate a chromatographic result identifying the presence of the SARS-CoV-2 antigen, and thus an active infection, within a patient anterior nares swab sample. Our 15-min test requires no equipment or laboratory infrastructure to administer with a limit of detection of 2.0 × 102 TCID50/mL and 87.5% sensitivity, 100% specificity when tested against 40 known positive and 40 known negative patient samples established by a validated RT-qPCR test.
| S-EPMC8626481 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The need for high-affinity, SARS-CoV-2-specific monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) is critical in the face of the global COVID-19 pandemic, as such reagents can have important diagnostic, research, and therapeutic applications. Of greatest interest is the ~ 300 amino acid receptor binding domain (RBD) within the S1 subunit of the spike protein because of its key interaction with the human angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (hACE2) receptor present on many cell types, especially lung epithelial cells. We report here the development and functional characterization of 29 nM-affinity mouse SARS-CoV-2 mAbs created by an accelerated immunization and hybridoma screening process. Differing functions, including binding of diverse protein epitopes, viral neutralization, impact on RBD-hACE2 binding, and immunohistochemical staining of infected lung tissue, were correlated with variable gene usage and sequence.
| S-EPMC8102525 | biostudies-literature
Project description:To control the spread of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) epidemics, it is necessary to have easy-to-use, reliable diagnostic tests available. The nasopharyngeal sampling method being often uncomfortable, nasal sampling could prove to be a viable alternative to the reference sampling method. We performed a multicentre, prospective validation study of the COVID-VIRO® test, using a nasal swab sampling method, in a point-of-care setting. In addition, we performed a multicentre, prospective, and usability study to validate the use of the rapid antigen nasal diagnostic test by laypersons. In March 2021, 239 asymptomatic and symptomatic patients were included in the validation study. Compared with reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction on nasopharyngeal samples, the sensitivity and specificity of the COVID-VIRO® Antigen test combined with a nasal sampling method were evaluated as 96.88% and 100%, respectively. A total of 101 individuals were included in the usability study. Among these, 99% of the participants rated the instructions material as good, 98% of the subjects executed the test procedure well, and 98% of the participants were able to correctly interpret the test results. This study validates the relevance of COVID-VIRO® as a diagnostic tool from nasal specimens as well as its usability in the general population. COVID-VIRO® diagnostic performances and ease of use make it suitable for widespread utilization.
| S-EPMC8426870 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Point-of-care (POC) tests to detect SARS-CoV-2 antibodies offer quick assessment of serostatus after natural infection or vaccination. We compared the field performance of the BioMedomics COVID-19 IgM/IgG Rapid Antibody Test against an ELISA in 303 participants enrolled in a SARS-CoV-2 household cohort study. The rapid antibody test was easily implemented with consistent interpretation across 14 users in a variety of field settings. Compared with ELISA, detection of seroconversion lagged by 5 to 10 days. However, it retained a sensitivity of 90% (160/177, 95% confidence interval [CI] 85-94%) and specificity of 100% (43/43, 95% CI 92-100%) for those tested 3 to 5 weeks after symptom onset. Sensitivity was diminished among those with asymptomatic infection (74% [14/19], 95% CI 49-91%) and early in infection (45% [29/64], 95% CI 33-58%). When used appropriately, rapid antibody tests offer a convenient way to detect symptomatic infections during convalescence.
| S-EPMC8733539 | biostudies-literature