Dataset Information

Evaluation of the usability of various rapid antibody tests in the diagnostic application for COVID-19.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The usability of laboratory tests related to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is critically important for the world undergoing the COVID-19 pandemic. The present study aimed to assess the diagnostic usability of rapid tests for the detection of antibody against SARS-CoV-2 through comparison of their results with the results of reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) test for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 genomic RNA and with the results of a quantitative test for antibody detection.

Methods

Serum samples were collected from 18 patients undergoing RT-PCR testing for SARS-CoV-2. Twelve patients were RT-PCR positive while six were negative. A quantitative test based on chemiluminescent immunoassay and three rapid tests based on immunochromatography were performed to detect anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG and IgM.

Results

All the antibody tests exhibited poor sensitivity at the timing of initial RT-PCR diagnosis. IgG responses occurring prior to or simultaneously with IgM responses were observed through not only the quantitative test but also the three rapid tests. Based on concordance with the quantitative test results, the large variance among the three rapid tests was revealed.

Conclusions

All antibody tests were unsatisfactory to replace RT-PCR for the early diagnosis of COVID-19. Rapid antibody tests as well as a quantitative antibody test were useful in the assessment of immune responses in COVID-19. The obvious variance among the three rapid tests suggested limited accuracy and difficult standardization. Diagnostic usability of rapid antibody tests for COVID-19 should be investigated rigorously.

SUBMITTER: Uwamino Y

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7797350 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Three different genotypes of chikungunya virus (CHIKV) have been classified: East/Central/South African (ECSA), West African (WA), and Asian. Previously, a rapid immunochromatographic (IC) test detecting CHIKV E1-antigen showed high sensitivity for certain ECSA-genotype viruses, but this test showed poor performance against the Asian-genotype virus that is spreading in the American continents. We found that the reactivity of one monoclonal antibody (MAb) used in the IC rapid diagnostic test (RDT) is affected by a single amino acid substitution in E1. Therefore, we developed new MAbs that exhibited specific recognition of all three genotypes of CHIKV. METHODS:Using a combination of the newly generated MAbs, we developed a novel version of the IC RDT with improved sensitivity to Asian-genotype CHIKV. To evaluate the sensitivity, specificity, and cross-reactivity of the new version of the IC RDT, we first used CHIKV isolates and E1-pseudotyped lentiviral vectors. We then used clinical specimens obtained in Aruba in 2015 and in Bangladesh in 2017 for further evaluation of RDT sensitivity and specificity. Another alphavirus, sindbis virus (SINV), was used to test RDT cross-reactivity. RESULTS:The new version of the RDT detected Asian-genotype CHIKV at titers as low as 10^4 plaque-forming units per mL, a concentration that was below the limit of detection of the old version. The new RDT had sensitivity to the ECSA genotype that was comparable with that of the old version, yielding 92% (92 out of 100) sensitivity (95% confidence interval 85.0-95.9) and 100% (100 out of 100) specificity against a panel of 100 CHIKV-positive and 100 CHIKV-negative patient sera obtained in the 2017 outbreak in Bangladesh. CONCLUSIONS:Our newly developed CHIKV antigen-detecting RDT demonstrated high levels of sensitivity and lacked cross-reactivity against SINV. These results suggested that our new version of the CHIKV E1-antigen RDT is promising for use in areas in which the Asian and ECSA genotypes of CHIKV circulate. Further validation with large numbers of CHIKV-positive and -negative clinical samples is warranted. (323 words).

Project description:Introduction: For the COVID-19 (SARS-CoV-2) response, COVID-19 antigen (Ag), and antibody (Ab) rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) are expected to complement central molecular testing particularly in low-resource settings. The present review assesses requirements for implementation of COVID-19 RDTs in sub-Saharan Africa. Methods: Review of PubMed-published articles assessing COVID-19 RDTs complemented with Instructions for Use (IFU) of products. Results: In total 47 articles on two COVID-19 Ag RDTs and 54 COVID-19 Ab RDTs and IFUs of 20 COVID-19 Ab RDTs were retrieved. Only five COVID-19 Ab RDTs (9.3%) were assessed with capillary blood sampling at the point-of-care; none of the studies were conducted in sub-Saharan Africa. Sampling: Challenges for COVID-19 Ag RDTs include nasopharyngeal sampling (technique, biosafety) and sample stability; for COVID-19 Ab RDTs equivalence of whole blood vs. plasma/serum needs further validation (assessed for only eight (14.8%) products). Sensitivity-Specificity: sensitivity of COVID-19 Ag and Ab RDTs depend on viral load (antigen) and timeframe (antibody), respectively; COVID-19 Ab tests have lower sensitivity compared to laboratory test platforms and the kinetics of IgM and IgG are very similar. Reported specificity was high but has not yet been assessed against tropical pathogens. Kit configuration: For COVID-19 Ag RDTs, flocked swabs should be added to the kit; for COVID-19 Ab RDTs, finger prick sampling materials, transfer devices, and controls should be added (currently only supplied in 15, 5, and 1/20 products). Usability and Robustness: some COVID-19 Ab RDTs showed high proportions of faint lines (>40%) or invalid results (>20%). Shortcomings were reported for buffer vials (spills, air bubbles) and their instructions for use. Stability: storage temperature was ≤ 30°C for all but one RDT, in-use and result stability were maximal at 1 h and 30 min, respectively. Integration in the healthcare setting requires a target product profile, landscape overview of technologies, certified manufacturing capacity, a sustainable market, and a stringent but timely regulation. In-country deployment depends on integration in the national laboratory network. Discussion/Conclusion: Despite these limitations, successful implementation models in triage, contact tracing, and surveillance have been proposed, in particular for COVID-19 Ab RDTs. Valuable experience is available from implementation of other disease-specific RDTs in sub-Saharan Africa.