| Autor: |
Nam K. Tran, Larissa May, Stuart H. Cohen, John Rodrigo, Raymond Gong, Ying Liu, Peter Conner |
| Jazyk: |
angličtina |
| Rok vydání: |
2022 |
| Předmět: |
|
| Zdroj: |
Practical Laboratory Medicine, Vol 31, Iss , Pp e00289- (2022) |
| Druh dokumentu: |
article |
| ISSN: |
2352-5517 |
| DOI: |
10.1016/j.plabm.2022.e00289 |
| Popis: |
Background: The 2019 novel coronavirus infectious disease (COVID-19) pandemic resulted in a surge of assays aimed at detecting severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) – coronavirus (CoV) – 2 infection and prior exposure. Although both molecular and antigen testing have clearly defined uses, the utility of serology remains uncertain and is presently not recommended for assessing immunity. Methods: We conducted a pragmatic, observational study evaluating four commercially available emergency use authorized laboratory-based COVID-19 serology assays (Assays A–D). Remnant samples from hospitalized, and non-hospitalized SARS-CoV-2 PCR positive patients, as well as vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals were collected and tested. Positive percent agreement (PPA) and negative percent agreement (NPA) were calculated. Antibody concentrations were compared across the platforms and populations. Results: A total of 588 remnant samples derived from 500 patients were tested. PPA at 5–12 weeks post-PCR positive results for Assays A-D was 98.3, 97.4, 99.2, and 95.8% respectively. NPA was 100% across all platforms. Mean antibody concentrations at 2–4 weeks post-PCR positive result were significantly higher in hospitalized versus non-hospitalized patients, respectively, for Assay A (131.8 [101.7] vs. 95.6 [100.3] AU/mL, P |
| Databáze: |
Directory of Open Access Journals |
| Externí odkaz: |
|
