Tweet
Virus Res. Serological assays for emerging coronaviruses: Challenges and pitfalls
[Source: ScienceDirect, full page: (LINK). Abstract, edited.]
Virus Research, Available online 23 March 2014 - In Press, Accepted Manuscript.
Serological assays for emerging coronaviruses: Challenges and pitfalls
Benjamin Meyer, Christian Drosten, Marcel A. M?ller
Institute of Virology, University of Bonn Medical Centre, Bonn, Germany
Received 11 February 2014, Accepted 10 March 2014, Available online 23 March 2014 / http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.virusres.2014.03.018
Highlights
Abstract
More than a decade after the emergence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) in 2002/2003 the occurrence of a novel CoV termed Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS) CoV challenges researchers and public health authorities. To control spread and finally contain novel viruses, rapid identification and subsequent isolation of infected individuals and their contacts is of utmost importance. Next to methods for nucleic acid detection, validated serological assays are particularly important as the timeframe for antibody detection is less restricted. During the SARS-CoV epidemic a wide variety of serological diagnostic assays were established using multiple methods as well as different viral antigens. Even though the majority of the developed assays showed high sensitivity and specificity, numerous studies reported on cross-reactive antibodies to antigens from wide-spread common cold associated CoVs. In order to improve preparedness and responsiveness during future outbreaks of novel CoVs, information and problems regarding serological diagnosis that occurred during the SARS-CoV should be acknowledged.
In this review we summarize the performance of different serological assays as well as the applicability of the two main applied antigens (spike and nucleocapsid protein) used during the SARS-CoV outbreak. We highlight challenges and potential pitfalls that occur when dealing with a novel emerging coronavirus like MERS-CoV. In addition we describe problems that might occur when animal sera are tested in serological assays for the identification of putative reservoirs. Finally, we give a recommendation for a serological testing scheme and outline necessary improvements that should be implemented for a better preparedness.
Keywords: Coronavirus; SARS; MERS; Reservoir; Serology; Antibody; Cross-reactivity
____
Corresponding author. Institute of Virology University of Bonn Medical Centre Sigmund Freud Str. 25, 53105 Bonn Germany.
Copyright ? 2014 Published by Elsevier B.V.
Note to users: Accepted manuscripts are Articles in Press that have been peer reviewed and accepted for publication by the Editorial Board of this journal. They have not yet been copy edited and/or formatted in the journal house style, and may not yet have the full ScienceDirect functionality, e.g., supplementary files may still need to be added, links to references may not resolve yet etc. The text could still change before final publication.
Although accepted manuscripts do not have all bibliographic details available yet, they can already be cited using the year of online publication and the DOI, as follows: author(s), article title, journal (year), DOI. Please consult the journal's reference style for the exact appearance of these elements, abbreviation of journal names and use of punctuation.
When the final article is assigned to an issue of the journal, the Article in Press version will be removed and the final version will appear in the associated published issue of the journal. The date the article was first made available online will be carried over.
-
-------
Virus Research, Available online 23 March 2014 - In Press, Accepted Manuscript.
Serological assays for emerging coronaviruses: Challenges and pitfalls
Benjamin Meyer, Christian Drosten, Marcel A. M?ller
Institute of Virology, University of Bonn Medical Centre, Bonn, Germany
Received 11 February 2014, Accepted 10 March 2014, Available online 23 March 2014 / http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.virusres.2014.03.018
Highlights
- Serological studies on SARS- and MERS-Coronavirus (CoV) diagnostics were reviewed.
- Different types of serological assays and variable antigens were compared.
- Immunogenic epitopes of CoV Spike proteins were less conserved than Nucleocapsid proteins.
- Use of Spike proteins was found to be superior over Nucleocapsid proteins.
- Applicability of serological assays for analysis of animal sera was reviewed.
Abstract
More than a decade after the emergence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) in 2002/2003 the occurrence of a novel CoV termed Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS) CoV challenges researchers and public health authorities. To control spread and finally contain novel viruses, rapid identification and subsequent isolation of infected individuals and their contacts is of utmost importance. Next to methods for nucleic acid detection, validated serological assays are particularly important as the timeframe for antibody detection is less restricted. During the SARS-CoV epidemic a wide variety of serological diagnostic assays were established using multiple methods as well as different viral antigens. Even though the majority of the developed assays showed high sensitivity and specificity, numerous studies reported on cross-reactive antibodies to antigens from wide-spread common cold associated CoVs. In order to improve preparedness and responsiveness during future outbreaks of novel CoVs, information and problems regarding serological diagnosis that occurred during the SARS-CoV should be acknowledged.
In this review we summarize the performance of different serological assays as well as the applicability of the two main applied antigens (spike and nucleocapsid protein) used during the SARS-CoV outbreak. We highlight challenges and potential pitfalls that occur when dealing with a novel emerging coronavirus like MERS-CoV. In addition we describe problems that might occur when animal sera are tested in serological assays for the identification of putative reservoirs. Finally, we give a recommendation for a serological testing scheme and outline necessary improvements that should be implemented for a better preparedness.
Keywords: Coronavirus; SARS; MERS; Reservoir; Serology; Antibody; Cross-reactivity
____
Corresponding author. Institute of Virology University of Bonn Medical Centre Sigmund Freud Str. 25, 53105 Bonn Germany.
Copyright ? 2014 Published by Elsevier B.V.
Note to users: Accepted manuscripts are Articles in Press that have been peer reviewed and accepted for publication by the Editorial Board of this journal. They have not yet been copy edited and/or formatted in the journal house style, and may not yet have the full ScienceDirect functionality, e.g., supplementary files may still need to be added, links to references may not resolve yet etc. The text could still change before final publication.
Although accepted manuscripts do not have all bibliographic details available yet, they can already be cited using the year of online publication and the DOI, as follows: author(s), article title, journal (year), DOI. Please consult the journal's reference style for the exact appearance of these elements, abbreviation of journal names and use of punctuation.
When the final article is assigned to an issue of the journal, the Article in Press version will be removed and the final version will appear in the associated published issue of the journal. The date the article was first made available online will be carried over.
-
-------