tetano
Editor, Senior Moderator
Expert Rev Clin Immunol
. 2021 Mar 31.
doi: 10.1080/1744666X.2021.1908886. Online ahead of print.
A comparative review of immunoassays for COVID-19 detection
Elham Mohit[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Zahra Rostami[SUP] 2 [/SUP], Hossein Vahidi[SUP] 1 [/SUP]
Affiliations
Abstract
Introduction: The gold standard for diagnosis of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is detecting severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) by reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), which is expensive, time-consuming and may result in false-negative results. Serological tests can be employed for RT-PCR negative patients, contact tracing, determining the probability of protection against re-infection, and seroepidemiological studies.
Areas covered: The main methodologies of serology-based tests for detection of SARS-CoV-2 including enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISAs), chemiluminescent immunoassays (CLIAs) and lateral flow immunoassays (LFIAs) were reviewed and their diagnostic performances were compared. Herein, a literature review on the databases of PubMed, Scopus and Google Scholar between January 01, 2020 and June 30, 2020 based on the main serological methods for COVID-19 detection with the focus on comparative experiments was performed. The review was updated on 31[SUP]th[/SUP] December 2020.
Expert opinion: Serology testing could be considered as a part of diagnostic panel two weeks post symptom onset. Higher sensitivity for serology-based tests could be achieved by determining combined IgG/IgM titers. Furthermore, higher sensitive serological test detecting neutralization antibody could be developed by targeting spike (S) antigen. It was also demonstrated that the sensitivity of ELISA/CLIA-based methods are higher than LFIA devices.
Keywords: CLIA; COVID-19; EsLISA; LFIA; SARS-CoV-2; Serology.
. 2021 Mar 31.
doi: 10.1080/1744666X.2021.1908886. Online ahead of print.
A comparative review of immunoassays for COVID-19 detection
Elham Mohit[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Zahra Rostami[SUP] 2 [/SUP], Hossein Vahidi[SUP] 1 [/SUP]
Affiliations
- PMID: 33787412
- DOI: 10.1080/1744666X.2021.1908886
Abstract
Introduction: The gold standard for diagnosis of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is detecting severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) by reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), which is expensive, time-consuming and may result in false-negative results. Serological tests can be employed for RT-PCR negative patients, contact tracing, determining the probability of protection against re-infection, and seroepidemiological studies.
Areas covered: The main methodologies of serology-based tests for detection of SARS-CoV-2 including enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISAs), chemiluminescent immunoassays (CLIAs) and lateral flow immunoassays (LFIAs) were reviewed and their diagnostic performances were compared. Herein, a literature review on the databases of PubMed, Scopus and Google Scholar between January 01, 2020 and June 30, 2020 based on the main serological methods for COVID-19 detection with the focus on comparative experiments was performed. The review was updated on 31[SUP]th[/SUP] December 2020.
Expert opinion: Serology testing could be considered as a part of diagnostic panel two weeks post symptom onset. Higher sensitivity for serology-based tests could be achieved by determining combined IgG/IgM titers. Furthermore, higher sensitive serological test detecting neutralization antibody could be developed by targeting spike (S) antigen. It was also demonstrated that the sensitivity of ELISA/CLIA-based methods are higher than LFIA devices.
Keywords: CLIA; COVID-19; EsLISA; LFIA; SARS-CoV-2; Serology.