Analytical and diagnostic performances of a high-throughput immunoassay for SARS-CoV-2 IgM and IgG
Padoan, A.; Cosma, C.; Zaupa, P.; Plebani, M.
Show abstract
BackgroundO_ST_ABSAbstractC_ST_ABSReliable SARS-CoV-2 serological assays are required for diagnosing infections, for the serosurveillance of past exposures and for assessing the response to future vaccines. In this study, the analytical and clinical performances of a chemiluminescent immunoassays for SARS-CoV-2 IgM and IgG detection (Mindray CL-1200i), targeting Nucleocapsid (N) and receptor binding domain (RBD) portion of the Spike protein, were evaluated. MethodsPrecision and linearity were evaluated using standardized procedures. A total of 157 leftover serum samples from 81 hospitalized confirmed COVID-19 patients (38 with moderate and 43 with severe disease) and 76 SARS-CoV-2 negative subjects (44 healthcare workers, 20 individuals with rheumatic disorders, 12 pregnant women) were included in the study. In an additional series of 44 SARS-CoV-2 positive, IgM and IgG time kinetics were also evaluated in a time-period of 38 days. ResultsPrecision was below or equal to 4% for both IgM and IgG, in all the studied levels, whilst a slightly significant deviation from linearity was observed for both assays in the range of values covering the manufacturers cut-off. Considering a time frame [≥] 12 days post symptom onset, sensitivity and specificity for IgM were 92.3% (95%CI:79.1%-98.4%) and 92.1% (95%CI:83.6%-97.0%). In the same time frame, sensitivity and specificity for IgG were 100% (95%CI:91.0%-100%) and 93.4% (95%CI:85.3%-97.8%). The assays agreement was 73.9% (Cohens kappa of 0.373). Time kinetics showed a substantial overlapping of IgM and IgG response, the latter values being elevated up to 38 days from symptoms onset. ConclusionsAnalytical imprecision is satisfactory as well as the linearity, particularly when taking into account the fact that both assays are claimed to be qualitative. Diagnostic sensitivity of IgG was excellent, especially considering specimens collected [≥]12 days post symptom onset. Time kinetics suggest that IgM and IgG are detectable early in the course of infection, but the role of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in clinical practice still requires further evaluations.
Matching journals
The top 8 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Performance estimation of two in-house ELISA assays for COVID-19 surveillance through the combined detection of anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgA, IgM, and IgG immunoglobulin isotypes 97%
- A High-throughput Microsphere-based Immunoassay of Anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgM Testing for COVID-19 Diagnostics 97%
- Development And Performance Evaluation of A Rapid In-House ELISA for Retrospective Serosurveillance of SARS-CoV-2 96%
Similar papers in this journal
- Analytical and clinical performances of a SARS-CoV-2 S-RBD IgG assay: comparison with neutralization titers 98%
- Evaluation of four commercial, fully automated SARS-CoV-2 antibody tests suggests a revision of the Siemens SARS-CoV-2 IgG assay 95%
- Lumipulse G SARS-CoV-2 Ag Assay Evaluation for SARS-CoV-2 Antigen Detection Using 594 Nasopharyngeal Swab Samples from Different Testing Groups 95%
Similar papers in this journal
- Performance of a point of care test for detecting IgM and IgG antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 and seroprevalence in blood donors and health care workers in Panama 96%
- An “In-House” ELISA for SARS-CoV-2 RBD uncovers elevated immune response at higher altitudes 95%
- SARS-CoV-2 testing in the Slovak Republic from March 2020 to September 2022 – summary of the pandemic trends 95%
Similar papers in this journal
- Antibodies anti-SARS-CoV2 time-course in patients and vaccinated subjects: an evaluation of the harmonization of two different methods 96%
- Evaluation of commercial qPCR kits for detection of SARS-CoV-2 in pooled samples 95%
- Evaluation and modelling of the performance of an automated SARS-CoV-2 antigen assay according to sample type, target population and epidemic trends 95%
Similar papers in this journal
- Diagnostic comparison of three fully automated chemiluminescent immunoassay platforms for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies 96%
- Comparative evaluation of six immunoassays for the detection of antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 96%
- Evaluation of two RT-PCR techniques for SARS-CoV-2 RNA detection in serum for microbiological diagnosis 96%
"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.