Comparative assessment of multiple COVID-19 serological technologies supports continued evaluation of point-of-care lateral flow assays in hospital and community healthcare settings.

Autor: Pickering S; Department of Infectious Diseases, School of Immunology & Microbial Sciences, King's College London, London, United Kingdom., Betancor G; Department of Infectious Diseases, School of Immunology & Microbial Sciences, King's College London, London, United Kingdom., Galão RP; Department of Infectious Diseases, School of Immunology & Microbial Sciences, King's College London, London, United Kingdom., Merrick B; Centre for Clinical Infection and Diagnostics Research, Department of Infectious Diseases, Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom., Signell AW; Department of Infectious Diseases, School of Immunology & Microbial Sciences, King's College London, London, United Kingdom., Wilson HD; Department of Infectious Diseases, School of Immunology & Microbial Sciences, King's College London, London, United Kingdom., Kia Ik MT; Centre for Clinical Infection and Diagnostics Research, Department of Infectious Diseases, Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom., Seow J; Department of Infectious Diseases, School of Immunology & Microbial Sciences, King's College London, London, United Kingdom., Graham C; Department of Infectious Diseases, School of Immunology & Microbial Sciences, King's College London, London, United Kingdom., Acors S; Department of Infectious Diseases, School of Immunology & Microbial Sciences, King's College London, London, United Kingdom., Kouphou N; Department of Infectious Diseases, School of Immunology & Microbial Sciences, King's College London, London, United Kingdom., Steel KJA; Centre for Inflammation Biology and Cancer Immunology (CIBCI), Dept of Inflammation Biology, School of Immunology & Microbial Sciences, King's College London, London, United Kingdom., Hemmings O; Department of Immunobiology, School of Immunology and Microbial Sciences, Faculty of Life Sciences and Medicine, King's College London, London, United Kingdom., Patel A; Centre for Clinical Infection and Diagnostics Research, Department of Infectious Diseases, Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom., Nebbia G; Centre for Clinical Infection and Diagnostics Research, Department of Infectious Diseases, Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom., Douthwaite S; Centre for Clinical Infection and Diagnostics Research, Department of Infectious Diseases, Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom., O'Connell L; Centre for Clinical Infection and Diagnostics Research, Department of Infectious Diseases, Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom., Luptak J; MRC Laboratory of Molecular Biology, Cambridge, United Kingdom., McCoy LE; Division of Infection and Immunity, University College London (UCL), London, United Kingdom., Brouwer P; Department of Medical Microbiology, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam Infection & Immunity Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands., van Gils MJ; Department of Medical Microbiology, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam Infection & Immunity Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands., Sanders RW; Department of Medical Microbiology, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam Infection & Immunity Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands., Martinez Nunez R; Department of Infectious Diseases, School of Immunology & Microbial Sciences, King's College London, London, United Kingdom., Bisnauthsing K; Centre for Clinical Infection and Diagnostics Research, Department of Infectious Diseases, Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom., O'Hara G; Centre for Clinical Infection and Diagnostics Research, Department of Infectious Diseases, Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom., MacMahon E; Centre for Clinical Infection and Diagnostics Research, Department of Infectious Diseases, Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom., Batra R; Centre for Clinical Infection and Diagnostics Research, Department of Infectious Diseases, Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom., Malim MH; Department of Infectious Diseases, School of Immunology & Microbial Sciences, King's College London, London, United Kingdom., Neil SJD; Department of Infectious Diseases, School of Immunology & Microbial Sciences, King's College London, London, United Kingdom., Doores KJ; Department of Infectious Diseases, School of Immunology & Microbial Sciences, King's College London, London, United Kingdom., Edgeworth JD; Department of Infectious Diseases, School of Immunology & Microbial Sciences, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.; Centre for Clinical Infection and Diagnostics Research, Department of Infectious Diseases, Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom.
Jazyk: angličtina
Zdroj: PLoS pathogens [PLoS Pathog] 2020 Sep 24; Vol. 16 (9), pp. e1008817. Date of Electronic Publication: 2020 Sep 24 (Print Publication: 2020).
DOI: 10.1371/journal.ppat.1008817
Abstrakt: There is a clear requirement for an accurate SARS-CoV-2 antibody test, both as a complement to existing diagnostic capabilities and for determining community seroprevalence. We therefore evaluated the performance of a variety of antibody testing technologies and their potential use as diagnostic tools. Highly specific in-house ELISAs were developed for the detection of anti-spike (S), -receptor binding domain (RBD) and -nucleocapsid (N) antibodies and used for the cross-comparison of ten commercial serological assays-a chemiluminescence-based platform, two ELISAs and seven colloidal gold lateral flow immunoassays (LFIAs)-on an identical panel of 110 SARS-CoV-2-positive samples and 50 pre-pandemic negatives. There was a wide variation in the performance of the different platforms, with specificity ranging from 82% to 100%, and overall sensitivity from 60.9% to 87.3%. However, the head-to-head comparison of multiple sero-diagnostic assays on identical sample sets revealed that performance is highly dependent on the time of sampling, with sensitivities of over 95% seen in several tests when assessing samples from more than 20 days post onset of symptoms. Furthermore, these analyses identified clear outlying samples that were negative in all tests, but were later shown to be from individuals with mildest disease presentation. Rigorous comparison of antibody testing platforms will inform the deployment of point-of-care technologies in healthcare settings and their use in the monitoring of SARS-CoV-2 infections.
Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Databáze: MEDLINE
Externí odkaz:
Nepřihlášeným uživatelům se plný text nezobrazuje