scholarly journals EXPRESS: Evaluation of usability of various rapid antibody tests in diagnostic application for COVID-19

2020 ◽  
pp. 000456322098482
Author(s):  
Yoshifumi Uwamino ◽  
Masatoshi Wakui ◽  
Wataru Aoki ◽  
Toshinobu Kurafuji ◽  
Emmy Yanagita ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Antibody Test ◽  
Antibody Detection ◽  
Rt Pcr ◽  
Serum Samples ◽  
Quantitative Test ◽  
Pcr Diagnosis ◽  
Rapid Tests ◽  
Chemiluminescent Immunoassay ◽  
Antibody Tests ◽  
Rapid Antibody

Background: The usability of laboratory tests related to SARS-CoV-2 is critically important for the world undergoing the COVID-19 pandemic. The present study aimed to assess diagnostic usability of rapid tests for detection of antibody against SARS-CoV-2 through comparison of their results with results of RT-PCR test for detection of SARS-CoV-2 genomic RNA and with results of a quantitative test for antibody detection. Methods: Serum samples were collected from eighteen patients undergoing RT-PCR testing for SARS-CoV-2. Twelve patients were RT-PCR positive while six were negative. A quantitative test based on chemiluminescent immunoassay and three rapid tests based on immunochromatography were performed to detect anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG and IgM. Results: All the antibody tests exhibited poor sensitivity at the timing of initial RT-PCR diagnosis. IgG responses occurring prior to or simultaneously with IgM responses were observed through not only the quantitative test but also the three rapid tests. Based on concordance with the quantitative test results, the large variance among the three rapid tests was revealed. Conclusions: All antibody tests were unsatisfactory to replace RT-PCR for early diagnosis of COVID-19. Rapid antibody tests as well as a quantitative antibody test were useful in assessment of immune responses in COVID-19. The obvious variance among the three rapid tests suggested limited accuracy and difficult standardization. Diagnostic usability of rapid antibody tests for COVID-19 should be investigated rigorously.

scholarly journals Archived dengue serum samples produced false-positive results in SARS-CoV-2 lateral flow-based rapid antibody tests

2021 ◽  
Vol 70 (6) ◽  
Author(s):  
Himadri Nath ◽  
Abinash Mallick ◽  
Subrata Roy ◽  
Soumi Sukla ◽  
Keya Basu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Dengue Virus ◽  
False Positive ◽  
Lateral Flow ◽  
Accurate Estimation ◽  
Serum Samples ◽  
Positive Serum ◽  
Rapid Tests ◽  
Antibody Tests ◽  
Positive Results ◽  
Rapid Antibody

Co-endemicity of SARS-CoV-2 and dengue virus (DV) infection is becoming a matter of serious concern as it has been already reported that antibodies (Ab) elicited by SARS-CoV-2 infection can produce false-positive results in dengue IgG and IgM rapid tests and vice versa. Here we communicate that five of thirteen DV antibody-positive serum samples from Kolkata, archived in 2017 (predating the COVID-19 outbreak), produced false-positive results in SARS-CoV-2 IgG/IgM lateral flow-based rapid tests. Our results emphasize the importance of implementing tests with higher specificity to conduct sero-surveillance for accurate estimation of SARS-CoV-2/DV prevalence in regions where both viruses now co-exist.

scholarly journals Perbandingan Metode RT-PCR dan Tes Rapid Antibodi untuk Deteksi COVID-19

2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (Khusus) ◽  
pp. 47
Author(s):  
Anita Suswanti Agustina ◽  
Rizana Fajrunni'mah
Keyword(s):  
Rapid Test ◽  
Antibody Test ◽  
Rt Pcr ◽  
Literature Study ◽  
Antibody Testing ◽  
Advantages And Disadvantages ◽  
Pcr Method ◽  
Risk Of Exposure ◽  
Antibody Tests ◽  
Rapid Antibody

COVID-19 is caused by SARS-CoV-2, which can spread rapidly from human to human. There are several laboratory tests to detect COVID-19, including the Reverse Transcription-Polymerase Chain Reaction (RT-PCR) method and a rapid test antibody test to detect antibody reactions to SARS-CoV-2. Both methods have advantages and disadvantages of each, while the literature study comparing the two methods is currently limited. The type of research used is library research. Research materials have been collected from various journals, books, and guidelines, in line with the research topic, to obtain 24 library sources. The results of the literature study indicate that the target genes that can be used to detect COVID-19 RT-PCR methods include the N, E, RdRp, and ORF1a/b genes. The sensitivity of rapid antibody tests is known to range from 68−89%, while the specificity of rapid antibody tests ranges from 91−100%. RT-PCR has the advantage of being able to detect low-concentration antigens, but RT-PCR has weaknesses such as requiring expensive equipment and inspection fees, specially trained laboratory personnel, long working time, and high risk of exposure. Rapid antibody testing has advantages, including ease of sampling, lower testing costs, reduced risk of exposure to officers, does not require special equipment and space, but has the potential for cross-reactivity with other coronaviruses. Both the RT-PCR method and the rapid antibody test have their advantages and disadvantages, but rapid antibody testing with RT-PCR can improve the diagnosis of COVID-19. The results of this literature study are expected to be continued as a basis for further research on RT-PCR examination and antibody rapid test for COVID-19 detection in Indonesia, accompanied by information on onset time and time-testing with a large sample of research.

scholarly journals Evaluation of rapid antibody test and chest computed tomography results of COVID-19 patients: A retrospective study

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ali Ozturk ◽  
Taylan Bozok ◽  
Tugce Simsek Bozok
Keyword(s):  
Computed Tomography ◽  
Ct Scan ◽  
Antibody Test ◽  
Chest Ct ◽  
Rt Pcr ◽  
Serum Samples ◽  
Chest Computed Tomography ◽  
Ct Data ◽  
Chest Ct Scan ◽  
Rapid Antibody

AbstractBackgroundThe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) continues to spread around the world. Therefore, rapid, simpler, and more accurate diagnostic tests are urgently needed to diagnose the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the SARS-CoV-2 IgM/ IgG rapid antibody test results in symptomatic patients with COVID-19 and their chest computed tomography (CT) data.MethodsA total of 320 patients admitted to our hospital for different durations due to COVID-19 were included in the study. Serum samples were obtained within 0 to 7 days from COVID-19 patients confirmed by RT-PCR and chest CT scan. According to the SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR results, the patients included in the study were divided into two groups: PCR positive group (n=46), and PCR negative group (n=274).ResultsOf the 320 COVID-19 serum samples, IgM, IgG, and IgM/IgG were detected in 9.4%, 3.1%, and 17.8% within one week respectively. IgG/IgM antibodies were not detected in 69.7% of the patients. In the study, it was determined that 249 (77.8%) of 320 patients had positive chest CT scans. Four (5.6%) of 100 patients with negative chest CT scan had IgM positive and 2 (2.8%) had both IgM/ IgG positive. IgM was detected in 23 (9.2%), IgG in 1 (0.4%) and IgM/IgG in 35 (14%) of chest CT scan positive patients. The rate of CT findings in patients with antibody positivity (n=97) was found to be significantly higher than those with antibody negativity.ConclusionsThe results of the present study show the accurate and equivalent performance of serological antibody assays and chest CT in detecting SARS-CoV-2 0 to 7 days from the onset of COVID19 symptoms. When the RT-PCR is not available, we believe that the combination of immunochromatographic test and chest CT scan can increase diagnostic sensitivity for COVID-19.

scholarly journals Assessment of the Field Utility of a Rapid Point-of-Care Test for SARS-CoV-2 Antibodies in a Household Cohort

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mehal Churiwal ◽  
Kelly D. Lin ◽  
Salman Khan ◽  
Srijana Chhetri ◽  
Meredith S. Muller ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cohort Study ◽  
Confidence Interval ◽  
Point Of Care ◽  
Natural Infection ◽  
Field Performance ◽  
Antibody Test ◽  
Asymptomatic Infection ◽  
Point Of Care Test ◽  
Antibody Tests ◽  
Rapid Antibody

Point-of-care (POC) tests to detect SARS-CoV-2 antibodies offer quick assessment of serostatus after natural infection or vaccination. We compared the field performance of the BioMedomics COVID-19 IgM/IgG Rapid Antibody Test against an ELISA in 303 participants enrolled in a SARS-CoV-2 household cohort study. The rapid antibody test was easily implemented with consistent interpretation across 14 users in a variety of field settings. Compared with ELISA, detection of seroconversion lagged by 5 to 10 days. However, it retained a sensitivity of 90% (160/177, 95% confidence interval [CI] 85–94%) and specificity of 100% (43/43, 95% CI 92–100%) for those tested 3 to 5 weeks after symptom onset. Sensitivity was diminished among those with asymptomatic infection (74% [14/19], 95% CI 49–91%) and early in infection (45% [29/64], 95% CI 33–58%). When used appropriately, rapid antibody tests offer a convenient way to detect symptomatic infections during convalescence.

scholarly journals Prevalence and genetic characterization of Toxoplasma gondii in naturally infected backyard pigs intended for familial consumption in Romania

2019 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Anamaria Ioana Paştiu ◽  
Anamaria Cozma-Petruț ◽  
Aurélien Mercier ◽  
Anamaria Balea ◽  
Lokman Galal ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Toxoplasma Gondii ◽  
Rural Areas ◽  
Antibody Test ◽  
Antibody Detection ◽  
Serum Samples ◽  
Potential Threat ◽  
Polymerase Chain ◽  
Pcr Targeting ◽  
Backyard Pigs

Abstract Background Foodborne toxoplasmosis in humans can be due to the exposure to tissue cysts of Toxoplasma gondii through the consumption of meat, including pork, of infected animals. Traditional Romanian food habits include pork as the preferred meat, while backyard pig rearing remains a common practice in many rural areas of Romania. The aims of the present study were to estimate the prevalence of T. gondii infection in naturally infected backyard pigs slaughtered for familial consumption and to genetically characterize the T. gondii strains obtained. Methods Paired blood and heart samples were collected from 94 backyard pigs, home slaughtered for private consumption. Serum samples were analyzed using the immunofluorescence antibody test (IFAT) for anti-T. gondii antibody detection. Heart samples were screened by polymerase chain reaction (PCR) targeting the 529-bp repeat region (REP529) for T. gondii detection. In addition, heart samples from IFAT positive animals were bioassayed in mice. The T. gondii isolates were genotyped by the analysis of 15 microsatellite markers. Results The results showed that almost half of the pigs investigated were T. gondii seropositive (46.8%, 95% confidence interval (CI): 36.4–57.4%) and in more than a quarter of the pigs (26.6%, 95% CI: 18.0–36.7%), the parasite was detected by PCR. Three (3/44) T. gondii strains were isolated from hearts of seropositive pigs and they all belonged to genotype II. Conclusions The present study showed the presence of T. gondii infection in backyard pigs in Romania, which suggests that consumption of pork from animals reared and slaughtered at home may pose a potential threat to human health and should be given attention. In addition, to our knowledge, this is the first study to provide data concerning T. gondii strains circulating in pigs from Romania.

scholarly journals Evaluation of Six Commercial Point-of-Care Tests for Diagnosis of Acute Dengue Infections: the Need for Combining NS1 Antigen and IgM/IgG Antibody Detection To Achieve Acceptable Levels of Accuracy

2011 ◽  
Vol 18 (12) ◽  
pp. 2095-2101 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stuart D. Blacksell ◽  
Richard G. Jarman ◽  
Mark S. Bailey ◽  
Ampai Tanganuchitcharnchai ◽  
Kemajittra Jenjaroen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Dengue Fever ◽  
Sensitivity And Specificity ◽  
Dengue Infection ◽  
Antibody Test ◽  
Antibody Detection ◽  
Sample Collection ◽  
Igg Antibody ◽  
Igm Antibody ◽  
Ns1 Antigen ◽  
Antibody Tests

ABSTRACTSix assays were evaluated in this study to determine their suitability for the diagnosis of acute dengue infection using samples from 259 Sri Lankan patients with acute fevers (99 confirmed dengue cases and 160 patients with other confirmed acute febrile illnesses): (i) the Merlin dengue fever IgG & IgM combo device (Merlin), (ii) the Standard Diagnostics Dengue Duo nonstructural 1 (NS1) antigen and IgG/IgM combo device (Standard Diagnostics, South Korea), (iii) the Biosynex Immunoquick dengue fever IgG and IgM (Biosynex, France) assay, (iv) the Bio-Rad NS1 antigen strip (Bio-Rad, France), (v) the Panbio Dengue Duo IgG/IgM Cassette (Inverness, Australia), and (vi) the Panbio dengue NS1 antigen strip (Inverness, Australia). The median number of days of fever prior to admission sample collection was 5 days (interquartile range, 3 to 7 days). Sensitivity and specificity of the NS1 antigen tests ranged from 49 to 59% and from 93 to 99%, respectively, and sensitivity and sensitivity of the IgM antibody test ranged from 71 to 80% and from 46 to 90%, respectively. Combining the NS1 antigen and IgM antibody results from the Standard Diagnostics Dengue Duo test gave the best compromise of sensitivity and specificity (93% and 89%, respectively) and provided the best sensitivity in patients presenting at different times after fever onset. The Merlin IgM/IgG antibody tests correctly classified 64% and 86% of the primary and secondary dengue infection cases, respectively, and the Standard Diagnostics IgM/IgG antibody tests correctly classified 71% and 83% of the primary and secondary dengue infection cases, respectively. This study provides strong evidence of the value of combining dengue antigen- and antibody-based test results in the rapid diagnostic test (RDT) format for the acute diagnosis of dengue.

scholarly journals Accuracy of Rapid Point-of-Care Antibody Test in patients with suspected or confirmed COVID-19

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rama Vancheeswaran ◽  
Merlin L Willcox ◽  
Beth Stuart ◽  
Matthew Knight ◽  
Hala Kandil ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Point Of Care ◽  
Antibody Test ◽  
Reference Laboratory ◽  
List Type ◽  
Reference Standard ◽  
Point Of Care Test ◽  
History Of ◽  
Antibody Tests ◽  
Composite Reference Standard ◽  
Rapid Antibody

AbstractObjectivesTo assess the real-world diagnostic accuracy of the Livzon point-of-care rapid test for antibodies to SARS-COV-2DesignProspective cohort studySettingDistrict general hospital in EnglandParticipants173 Patients and 224 hospital staff with a history of COVID-19 symptoms, and who underwent PCR and/or reference antibody testing for COVID-19.InterventionsThe Livzon point-of-care (POC) lateral flow immunoassay rapid antibody test (IgM and IgG) was conducted at least 7 days after onset of symptoms and compared to the composite reference standard of PCR for SARS-COV-2 plus reference laboratory testing for antibodies to SARS-COV-2. The SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR was tested using the available molecular technology during the study time (PHE laboratories, GeneXpert® system Xpert, Xpress SARS-CoV-2 and Source bioscience laboratory). All molecular platforms/assays were PHE/NHSE approved. The reference antibody test was the Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 assay (Roche diagnostics GmBH).Main outcome measuresSensitivity and specificity of the rapid antibody testResultsThe reference antibody test was positive in 190/268 (70.9%) of participants with a history of symptoms suggestive of COVID-19; in the majority (n=312) the POC test was taken 35 days or more after onset of symptoms. The POC antibody test had an overall sensitivity of 90.1% (292/328, 95% CI 86.3 – 93.1) and specificity of 100% (68/68, 95% CI 94.7 - 100) for confirming prior SARS-CoV-2 infection when compared to the composite reference standard. Sensitivity was 97.8% (89/92, 95% CI 92.3% to 99.7%) in participants who had been admitted to hospital and 84.4% (124/147, 95% CI 77.5% to 89.8%) in those with milder illness who had never been seen in hospital.ConclusionsThe Livzon point-of-care antibody test had comparable sensitivity and specificity to the reference laboratory antibody test, so could be used in clinical settings to support decision-making about patients presenting with more than 10 days of symptoms of COVID-19.What is already known on this topic-Presence of IgG and IgM antibodies to SARS-COV-2 indicates that the person was infected at least 7 days previously and is usually no longer infectious.-Rapid point-of-care tests for antibodies to SARS-COV-2 are widely available, cheap and easy to use-Preliminary evaluations suggested that rapid antibody tests may have insufficient accuracy to be useful for testing individual patients.What this study adds-The rapid point-of-care test for antibodies to SARS-COV-2 was 90.1% sensitive and 100% specific compared to reference standards for prior infection with COVID-19.-This is comparable to reference antibody tests-The point-of-care test evaluated in this study could be used to support clinical decision-making in real time, for patients presenting with symptoms of possible COVID-19 with at least 10 days of symptoms.

scholarly journals Diagnostic Properties of Three SARS-CoV-2 Antibody Tests

Diagnostics ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (8) ◽  
pp. 1441
Author(s):  
Suelen Basgalupp ◽  
Giovana dos Santos ◽  
Marina Bessel ◽  
Lara Garcia ◽  
Ana Carolina de Moura ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rapid Test ◽  
Epidemiological Studies ◽  
Antibody Detection ◽  
Sample Collection ◽  
Rt Pcr ◽  
Igg Antibody ◽  
Serological Tests ◽  
High Agreement ◽  
High Level ◽  
Antibody Tests

Serological assays emerged as complementary tools to RT-PCR in the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 as well as being needed for epidemiological studies. This study aimed to assess the performance of a rapid test (RT) compared to that of serological tests using finger prick blood samples. A total of 183 samples were evaluated, 88 of which were collected from individuals with negative RT-PCR and 95 from positive RT-PCR individuals. The diagnostic performance of RT (WONDFO®) and LUMIT (PROMEGA®) were compared to that of ELISA (EUROIMMUN®) for detecting antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 according to time from symptoms onset. The IgG antibody tests were detected in 77.4% (LUMIT), 77.9% (RT), and 80.0% (ELISA) of individuals. The detection of antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 increases in accordance with increasing time from symptoms onset. Considering only time from symptoms onset >21 days, the positivity rate ranged from 81.8 to 97.0% between the three tests. The RT and LUMIT showed high agreement with ELISA (agreement = 91.5%, k = 0.83, and agreement = 96.3%, k = 0.9, respectively) in individuals who had symptoms 15 to 21 days before sample collection. Compared to that of the ELISA assay, our results show sensitivity ranged from 95% to 100% for IgG antibody detection in individuals with symptoms onset between 15 and 21 days before sample collection. The specificity was 100% in individuals with symptoms onset >15 days before serological tests. This study shows good performance and high level of agreement of three immunoassays for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies.

scholarly journals Validation of Selected Commercial Serological Assays for Diagnosis of COVID-19

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Salma Younes ◽  
Hadeel Al-Jighefee ◽  
Farah Shurrab ◽  
Duaa Al-Sadeq ◽  
Hadi Yassine ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Neutralization Test ◽  
Cross Reactivity ◽  
Clinical Settings ◽  
Igg Antibodies ◽  
Excellent Correlation ◽  
Rt Pcr ◽  
Rapid Assays ◽  
Igm Elisa ◽  
Rapid Tests ◽  
Antibody Tests

As researchers around the globe rush to put the available antibody tests to use, concerns have been raised about their precision. This study aimed to evaluate and compare the performance of selected commercial & automated serological assays that are widely used in different clinical settings in Qatar. We validated the performance of five commercial IgG and IgM ELISA kits, three fully automated immunoassays, and two commercial rapid tests. The sensitivity of all assays was compared to RT-PCR and a surrogate virus neutralization test (sVNT). In addition, cross-reactivity was investigated. Among the evaluated kits, Lionex IgG assay demonstrated the best performance (~88% sensitivity and ~99 specificity). All automated assays showed an excellent correlation with the neutralization test with an overall agreement of 93.6-98.5%. The rapid assays demonstrated a very good performance in detecting IgG antibodies (86.0-88.0% sensitivity and 98.0-100% specificity).

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document