Evaluation of three immunochromatographic tests for rapid detection of antibodies against SARS-CoV-2
- 17 August 2020
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Springer Science and Business Media LLC in European Journal of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases
- Vol. 39 (12), 2289-2297
- https://doi.org/10.1007/s10096-020-04010-7
Abstract
Lateral flow immunoassays (LFIA) for rapid detection of specific antibodies (IgM and IgG) against SARS-CoV-2 in different human specimens have been developed in response to the pandemic. The aim of this study is to evaluate three immunocromathographic assays (Sienna®, Wondfo® and Prometheus®) for detection of antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 in serum samples, considering RT-qPCR as a reference. A total of 145 serum samples from 145 patients with clinical suspicion of COVID-19 were collected: all of the samples were tested with Sienna®, 117 with Wondfo® and 89 with Prometheus®. The overall results of sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value obtained were as follows: 64.4%, 75%, 85.5% and 47.8% with Sienna®; 45.2%, 81.8%, 80.5% and 47.4% with Wondfo® and 75.5%, 12.5%, 51.4% and 29.4% with Prometheus®. The accuracy of the test for Sienna®, Wondfo® and Prometheus® was 67.6%, 59% and 47.2%, with a prevalence of COVID-19 of 69.7%, 62.4% and 55.1% respectively. Sensitivity of the three tests (Sienna®, Wondfo® and Prometheus® respectively) along the three different stages was 36.6%, 18.8% and 68.6% in the early stage (first week); 81.3%, 74.1% and 90.9% in the intermediate stage (second week) and 100%, 83.3% and 100% in the late stage (third week). The results demonstrate that even though Prometheus® presented a high sensitivity, the specificity was notably lower than the other two tests. Sienna® showed the greatest contrast between sensitivity and specificity, achieving the best accuracy, followed by Wondfo®. The sensitivity of the three ICT assays was higher in late stages of the disease.Keywords
This publication has 31 references indexed in Scilit:
- Correlation of Chest CT and RT-PCR Testing for Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) in China: A Report of 1014 CasesRadiology, 2020
- Sensitivity of Chest CT for COVID-19: Comparison to RT-PCRRadiology, 2020
- Chest CT for Typical Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Pneumonia: Relationship to Negative RT-PCR TestingRadiology, 2020
- Positive RT-PCR Test Results in Patients Recovered From COVID-19JAMA, 2020
- Development and clinical application of a rapid IgM‐IgG combined antibody test for SARS‐CoV‐2 infection diagnosisJournal of Medical Virology, 2020
- A Novel Coronavirus from Patients with Pneumonia in China, 2019The New England Journal of Medicine, 2020
- Genomic characterisation and epidemiology of 2019 novel coronavirus: implications for virus origins and receptor bindingThe Lancet, 2020
- Detection of 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) by real-time RT-PCREurosurveillance, 2020
- Molecular and serological investigation of 2019-nCoV infected patients: implication of multiple shedding routesEmerging Microbes & Infections, 2020
- CRISPR-Cas14 is now part of the artillery for gene editing and molecular diagnosticNanomedicine: Nanotechnology, Biology and Medicine, 2019