Evaluation of recombinant nucleocapsid and spike proteins for serological diagnosis of novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)
Zhang, P.; Gao, Q.; Wang, T.; Ke, Y.; Mo, F.; Jia, R.; Liu, W.; Liu, L.; Zheng, S.; Liu, Y.; Li, L.; Wang, Y.; Xu, L.; Hao, K.; Yang, R.; Li, S.; Lin, C.; Zhao, Y.
Show abstract
BackgroundThe colloidal gold immunochromatography assay (GICA) is a rapid diagnostic tool for novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infections. However, with significant numbers of false negatives, improvements to GICA are needed. MethodsSix recombinant HCoV-19 nucleocapsid and spike proteins were prepared and evaluated. The optimal proteins were employed to develop a sandwich-format GICA strip to detect total antibodies (IgM and IgG) against HCoV-19. GICAs performance was assessed with comparison of viral RNA detection. ResultsRecombinant HCoV-19 proteins were obtained, including three prokaryotically expressed rN, rN1, rN2 nucleocapsid proteins, and three eukaryotically expressed rS1, rS-RBD, rS-RBD-mFc spike proteins. The recombinant proteins with the highest ELISA titers (rS1 and rS-RBD-mFc) against coronavirus-specific IgM and IgG were chosen for GICA development. The GICA has a sensitivity and specificity of 86.89% (106/122) and 99.39% (656/660), respectively. Furthermore, 65.63% (21/32) of the clinically confirmed but RT-PCR negative samples were GICA positive. ConclusionsThe eukaryotically-expressed spike proteins (rS1and rS-RBD-mFc) are more suitable than the prokaryotically expressed nucleocapsid proteins for HCoV-19 serological diagnosis. The GICA sandwich used to detect total antibodies is a powerful complement to the current standard RNA-based tests.
Matching journals
The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Diagnostic comparison of three fully automated chemiluminescent immunoassay platforms for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies 96%
- Evaluation of two RT-PCR techniques for SARS-CoV-2 RNA detection in serum for microbiological diagnosis 95%
- Comparative evaluation of six immunoassays for the detection of antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- Sensitivity evaluation of 2019 novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) RT-PCR detection kits and strategy to reduce false negative 96%
- Validation of a new automated chemiluminescent anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgM and IgG antibody assay system detecting both N and S proteins in Japan 96%
- Development And Performance Evaluation of A Rapid In-House ELISA for Retrospective Serosurveillance of SARS-CoV-2 96%
Similar papers in this journal
- Evaluation the auxiliary diagnosis value of antibodies assays for detection of novel coronavirus (SARS-Cov-2) causing an outbreak of pneumonia (COVID-19) 96%
- Amplification of human β-glucoronidase gene for appraising the accuracy of negative SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR results in upper respiratory tract specimens 94%
- Evaluation of seven different rapid methods for nucleic acid detection of SARS-COV-2 virus 94%
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- Evaluation of commercial qPCR kits for detection of SARS-CoV-2 in pooled samples 94%
- Evaluation and modelling of the performance of an automated SARS-CoV-2 antigen assay according to sample type, target population and epidemic trends 94%
- Evaluation of VIDAS® diagnostic assay prototypes detecting dengue virus NS1 antigen and anti-dengue virus IgM and IgG antibodies 93%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.