• 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.

Emerg Microbes Infect . Serological Differentiation Between COVID-19 and SARS Infections

tetano

Editor, Senior Moderator
Emerg Microbes Infect


. 2020 Jun 12;1-23.
doi: 10.1080/22221751.2020.1780951. Online ahead of print.
Serological Differentiation Between COVID-19 and SARS Infections


Wan Ni Chia[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Chee Wah Tan[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Randy Foo[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Adrian Eng Zheng Kang[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Yilong Peng[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Velraj Sivalingam[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Charles Tiu[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Xin Mei Ong[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Feng Zhu[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Barnaby E Young[SUP] 2 3 4 [/SUP], Mark I C Chen[SUP] 2 5 [/SUP], Yee-Joo Tan[SUP] 6 7 [/SUP], David C Lye[SUP] 2 3 4 8 [/SUP], Danielle E Anderson[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Lin-Fa Wang[SUP] 1 [/SUP]



Affiliations

Abstract

In response to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak, caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus, multiple diagnostic tests are required globally for acute disease diagnosis, contact tracing, monitoring of asymptomatic infection rates and assessing herd immunity. While PCR remains the frontline test of choice in the acute diagnostic setting, serological tests are urgently needed to fulfil the other requirements. Unlike PCR tests which are highly specific for each virus, cross-reactivity could potentially be a major challenge for COVID-19 antibody tests considering there are six other coronaviruses known to infect humans. Among the human pathogens, SARS-CoV is genetically most related to SARS-CoV-2 sharing approximately 80% sequence identity and both belong to the species SARS related coronavirus (SARSr-CoV) in the genus Betacoronavirus of family Coronaviridae. In this study, we developed and compared the performance of four different serological tests to comprehensively assess the cross-reactivity between COVID-19 and SARS patient sera. Our results indicate that there is a significant cross-reactivity when N protein of either SARS-CoV or SARS-CoV-2 is used. The S1 or RBD derived the spike (S) protein offers better specificity. Amongst the different platforms, capture ELISA performed best. Finally, we found that SARS survivors all have significant level of antibodies remaining in their blood 17 years after infection. We discovered that anti-N antibodies waned more than anti-RBD antibodies, and the latter is known to play a more important role in providing protective immunity.

Keywords: Antibody; COVID-19; SARS; SARS-CoV-2; Serology.
 
Back
Top Bottom