• FluTrackers.com Inc. does not provide medical advice. Information on this web site is collected from various internet resources, and the FluTrackers board of directors makes no warranty to the safety, efficacy, correctness or completeness of the information posted on this site by any author or poster. The information collated here is for instructional and/or discussion purposes only and is NOT intended to diagnose or treat any disease, illness, or other medical condition. Every individual reader or poster should seek advice from their personal physician/healthcare practitioner before considering or using any interventions that are discussed on this website. By continuing to access this website you agree to consult your personal physican before using any interventions posted on this website, and you agree to hold harmless FluTrackers.com Inc., the board of directors, the members, and all authors and posters for any effects from use of any medication, supplement, vitamin or other substance, device, intervention, etc. mentioned in posts on this website, or other internet venues referenced in posts on this website.
  • We are not asking for any donations. Do not donate to any entity who says they are raising funds for us.

Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis . Performance of the SureScreen Diagnostics COVID-19 antibody rapid test in comparison with three automated immunoassays

tetano

Editor, Senior Moderator
Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis


. 2023 Jan 10;105(4):115900.
doi: 10.1016/j.diagmicrobio.2023.115900. Online ahead of print.
Performance of the SureScreen Diagnostics COVID-19 antibody rapid test in comparison with three automated immunoassays


Sarah Mafi[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Sylvie Rogez[SUP] 2 [/SUP], Jérôme Darreye[SUP] 2 [/SUP], Sophie Alain[SUP] 3 [/SUP], Sébastien Hantz[SUP] 4 [/SUP]



Affiliations

Abstract

Lateral flow immunoassays (LFIA) for detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) antibodies are used for population surveillance and potentially individual risk assessment. The performance of the SureScreen Diagnostics LFIA targeting the spike protein was evaluated in comparison with 3 automated assays (Abbott Alinity-i SARS-CoV-2 IgG, DiaSorin Liaison® SARS-CoV-2 S1/S2 IgG, Wantai SARS-CoV-2 Ab ELISA). We assessed sensitivity using 110 serum samples from PCR confirmed COVID-19 infected patients. Specificity was evaluated using 120 prepandemic samples, including potential cross-reactive antibodies samples. Sensitivity ranged between 93.3% and 98.7% on samples collected >14 days postsymptom onset. All assays achieved a specificity >98%. Moreover, its performance seems not to be affected by Alpha, Beta or Delta variants over a wide range of antibody titers. The latter showed a very good agreement with the Wantai and the Abbott assays and a substantial agreement with the DiaSorin assay. Our data demonstrate the good clinical performance of the SureScreen Diagnostics LFIA for SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence screening.

Keywords: COVID-19; Lateral Flow Immunoassays (LFIA); SARS-CoV-2; SureScreen Diagnostics; serology.
 
Back
Top Bottom