Back

Multi-site Validation of a SARS-CoV-2 IgG/IgM Rapid Antibody Detection Kit

Minteer, C.; Casanovas-Massana, A.; Li, T.; McDonald, D.; Wang, L.; Pan, S. H.; Caianiello, D.; Collinski, J.; deRamon, E.; Hale, R.; Howell, R.; Ray, J.; Vinetz, J.; Levine, M.; Ko, A.; Spiegel, D.

2020-05-26 public and global health
10.1101/2020.05.25.20112227 medRxiv
Show abstract

Deaths from coronavirus disease (COVID-19) have exceeded 300,000 persons globally, calling for rapid development of mobile diagnostics that can assay widespread prevalence and infection rates. Data provided in this study supports the utility of a newly-designed lateral flow immunoassay (LFA) for detecting SARS-CoV-2 IgM and IgG antibodies. We employed a clinical cohort of 1,892 SARS-CoV-2 patients and controls, including individuals diagnosed by RT-qPCR at Yale New Haven Hospital, The First Affiliated Hospital of Anhui Medical University, the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention of Hefei City (Hefei CDC), Anhui Province (Anhui Province CDC), and Fuyang City (Fuyang CDC). The LFA studied here detects SARS-CoV-2 IgM and IgG antibodies with a specificity of 97.9-100% for IgM, 99.7-100% for IgG, and sensitivities ranging from 94.1-100% for patients >14-days post symptom onset. Sensitivity decreases in patients <14-days post symptom onset, which is likely due to lower IgG/IgM antibody levels in this population. Finally, we developed a visual intensity reporting system that we believe will be suitable for laboratory and point-of-care settings, and will provide granular information about antibody levels. Overall our results support the widespread utility of this and other LFAs in assessing population-level epidemiological statistics.

Matching journals

The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 12%
15.1%
2
Talanta
12 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
9.4%
3
JMIR Public Health and Surveillance
45 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
8.6%
4
SLAS Technology
11 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
7.3%
5
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 13%
7.0%
6
Analytical Chemistry
205 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
4.4%
50% of probability mass above
7
Journal of Clinical Microbiology
120 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
3.8%
8
Frontiers in Public Health
140 papers in training set
Top 2%
3.7%
9
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 44%
2.7%
10
Diagnostics
48 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
2.1%
11
Microbiology Spectrum
435 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.9%
12
International Journal of Infectious Diseases
126 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.7%
13
Frontiers in Medicine
113 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.4%
14
Clinical Chemistry
22 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.4%
15
Frontiers in Digital Health
20 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
1.3%
16
Heliyon
146 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.3%
17
Water Research
74 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.3%
18
Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (CCLM)
12 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
0.9%
19
Journal of Virological Methods
36 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
0.8%
20
Biosensors and Bioelectronics
52 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.8%
21
Journal of Medical Internet Research
85 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.8%
22
BMJ Open
554 papers in training set
Top 12%
0.8%
23
Genome Medicine
154 papers in training set
Top 8%
0.7%
24
ACS Sensors
45 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.7%
25
Journal of Clinical Virology
62 papers in training set
Top 1.0%
0.7%
26
BMC Medicine
163 papers in training set
Top 8%
0.7%
27
The Journal of Molecular Diagnostics
36 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
0.7%
28
Viruses
318 papers in training set
Top 6%
0.7%
29
The Journal of Infectious Diseases
182 papers in training set
Top 6%
0.5%
30
International Journal of Molecular Sciences
453 papers in training set
Top 19%
0.5%