tetano
Editor, Senior Moderator
Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis
. 2020 Nov 25.
doi: 10.1007/s10096-020-04091-4. Online ahead of print.
Comparison of various serological assays for novel SARS-COV-2
Mar?a Sim?n Sacristan[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Ana Collazos-Blanco[SUP] 2 [/SUP], Maria Isabel Zamora Cintas[SUP] 3 [/SUP], Alicia Serrano Garc?a[SUP] 3 [/SUP], Carmen Ybarra de Villavicencio[SUP] 3 [/SUP], Mar?a Mateo Maestre[SUP] 3 [/SUP]
Affiliations
Abstract
Coronavirus disease-19 (COVID19), the novel respiratory illness caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2), is associated with severe morbidity and mortality. The aim of our study was to compare different immunoassays. We evaluated three immunochromatographic test (The StrongStep?SARS-CoV-2 IgG/IgM kit, AllTest COV-19 IgG/IgM kit, and Wondfo? SARS-CoV-2 Antibody) and two chemiluminescence immunoassays (CMIA) (Covid-19 VIRCLIA? IgM+IgA/IgG monotest and the Abbott SARS-CoV-2 IgG assay) in COVID-19 patients. The assays were performed using serum samples of three group patients, i.e., healthy controls, patients with SARS-CoV-2 PCR positive, and patients with SARS-CoV-2 PCR negative clinically diagnosed of COVID-19 infection. The detection percentages of IgG with the StrongStep? SARS-CoV-2 IgG/IgM kit and AllTest COV-19 IgG/IgM kit were similar in both groups (83.3% and 80.6%, respectively in group 2, p = 0.766) and (42.9% and 50.0%, respectively in group 3, p = 0.706). There were some differences on IgM detection between StrongStep? SARS-CoV-2 IgG/IgM kit and AllTest COV-19 IgG/IgM kit (11.1% and 30.6%, respectively in group 2, p = 0.042 and 0.0% and 28.6%, respectively in group 3, p = 0.031). The positive rate of IgG in group 2 is higher compared to group 3 with the two immunoassays tested. We observe the same positive rates of IgG with the two CMIA. Our study shows excellent performance of CMIA compared to immunochromatographic test and confirms its potential use in the diagnosis of the new SARS-CoV-2.
Keywords: Antibodies; Chemiluminescence immunoassays; IgG; IgM; Immunochromatographic tests; SARS-CoV-2.
. 2020 Nov 25.
doi: 10.1007/s10096-020-04091-4. Online ahead of print.
Comparison of various serological assays for novel SARS-COV-2
Mar?a Sim?n Sacristan[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Ana Collazos-Blanco[SUP] 2 [/SUP], Maria Isabel Zamora Cintas[SUP] 3 [/SUP], Alicia Serrano Garc?a[SUP] 3 [/SUP], Carmen Ybarra de Villavicencio[SUP] 3 [/SUP], Mar?a Mateo Maestre[SUP] 3 [/SUP]
Affiliations
- PMID: 33236270
- DOI: 10.1007/s10096-020-04091-4
Abstract
Coronavirus disease-19 (COVID19), the novel respiratory illness caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2), is associated with severe morbidity and mortality. The aim of our study was to compare different immunoassays. We evaluated three immunochromatographic test (The StrongStep?SARS-CoV-2 IgG/IgM kit, AllTest COV-19 IgG/IgM kit, and Wondfo? SARS-CoV-2 Antibody) and two chemiluminescence immunoassays (CMIA) (Covid-19 VIRCLIA? IgM+IgA/IgG monotest and the Abbott SARS-CoV-2 IgG assay) in COVID-19 patients. The assays were performed using serum samples of three group patients, i.e., healthy controls, patients with SARS-CoV-2 PCR positive, and patients with SARS-CoV-2 PCR negative clinically diagnosed of COVID-19 infection. The detection percentages of IgG with the StrongStep? SARS-CoV-2 IgG/IgM kit and AllTest COV-19 IgG/IgM kit were similar in both groups (83.3% and 80.6%, respectively in group 2, p = 0.766) and (42.9% and 50.0%, respectively in group 3, p = 0.706). There were some differences on IgM detection between StrongStep? SARS-CoV-2 IgG/IgM kit and AllTest COV-19 IgG/IgM kit (11.1% and 30.6%, respectively in group 2, p = 0.042 and 0.0% and 28.6%, respectively in group 3, p = 0.031). The positive rate of IgG in group 2 is higher compared to group 3 with the two immunoassays tested. We observe the same positive rates of IgG with the two CMIA. Our study shows excellent performance of CMIA compared to immunochromatographic test and confirms its potential use in the diagnosis of the new SARS-CoV-2.
Keywords: Antibodies; Chemiluminescence immunoassays; IgG; IgM; Immunochromatographic tests; SARS-CoV-2.