Cargando…
Comparison of commercial lateral flow immunoassays and ELISA for SARS-CoV-2 antibody detection
BACKGROUND: COVID-19 pandemic has spread worldwide since December 2019. Serological tests for SARS-CoV-2 antibody testing are needed for detection of current or past infections. A wide range of commercial tests is available. However, most of them need to be validated. STUDY DESIGN: The aim was to co...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Elsevier B.V.
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7323682/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32659710 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcv.2020.104529 |
_version_ | 1783551815803994112 |
---|---|
author | Serrano, Maria Martínez Rodríguez, David Navalpotro Palop, Nuria Tormo Arenas, Roberto Olmos Córdoba, Marta Moreno Mochón, Mª Dolores Ocete Cardona, Concepción Gimeno |
author_facet | Serrano, Maria Martínez Rodríguez, David Navalpotro Palop, Nuria Tormo Arenas, Roberto Olmos Córdoba, Marta Moreno Mochón, Mª Dolores Ocete Cardona, Concepción Gimeno |
author_sort | Serrano, Maria Martínez |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: COVID-19 pandemic has spread worldwide since December 2019. Serological tests for SARS-CoV-2 antibody testing are needed for detection of current or past infections. A wide range of commercial tests is available. However, most of them need to be validated. STUDY DESIGN: The aim was to compare a commercial IgG and IgA ELISA (Euroimmun) with three lateral flow immunoassays (LFI): Hangzhou Alltest Biotech, Wuhan UNscience Biotechnology and Guangzhou Wondfo Biotech. Specificity was calculated with 62 available serum samples from 2018/19. The study included 152 sera from patients of which 109 were RT-PCR positive. Sensitivities for ELISA anti SARS-CoV-2 IgG and IgA were 81.5 % and 93.1 % and specificities 100 % and 80.6 %, respectively. LFI showed variable performances, overall results being better for Guangzhou Wondfo Biotech. CONCLUSIONS: Commercial serological tests are useful for detection of antibodies in patients with COVID-19. ELISA presented better results than LFI. The results allowed to incorporate the most sensitive LFI to the daily workflow, combining with ELISA. Careful validation is encouraged before clinical laboratories start using these tests. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7323682 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | Elsevier B.V. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-73236822020-06-30 Comparison of commercial lateral flow immunoassays and ELISA for SARS-CoV-2 antibody detection Serrano, Maria Martínez Rodríguez, David Navalpotro Palop, Nuria Tormo Arenas, Roberto Olmos Córdoba, Marta Moreno Mochón, Mª Dolores Ocete Cardona, Concepción Gimeno J Clin Virol Article BACKGROUND: COVID-19 pandemic has spread worldwide since December 2019. Serological tests for SARS-CoV-2 antibody testing are needed for detection of current or past infections. A wide range of commercial tests is available. However, most of them need to be validated. STUDY DESIGN: The aim was to compare a commercial IgG and IgA ELISA (Euroimmun) with three lateral flow immunoassays (LFI): Hangzhou Alltest Biotech, Wuhan UNscience Biotechnology and Guangzhou Wondfo Biotech. Specificity was calculated with 62 available serum samples from 2018/19. The study included 152 sera from patients of which 109 were RT-PCR positive. Sensitivities for ELISA anti SARS-CoV-2 IgG and IgA were 81.5 % and 93.1 % and specificities 100 % and 80.6 %, respectively. LFI showed variable performances, overall results being better for Guangzhou Wondfo Biotech. CONCLUSIONS: Commercial serological tests are useful for detection of antibodies in patients with COVID-19. ELISA presented better results than LFI. The results allowed to incorporate the most sensitive LFI to the daily workflow, combining with ELISA. Careful validation is encouraged before clinical laboratories start using these tests. Elsevier B.V. 2020-08 2020-06-29 /pmc/articles/PMC7323682/ /pubmed/32659710 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcv.2020.104529 Text en © 2020 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. Since January 2020 Elsevier has created a COVID-19 resource centre with free information in English and Mandarin on the novel coronavirus COVID-19. The COVID-19 resource centre is hosted on Elsevier Connect, the company's public news and information website. Elsevier hereby grants permission to make all its COVID-19-related research that is available on the COVID-19 resource centre - including this research content - immediately available in PubMed Central and other publicly funded repositories, such as the WHO COVID database with rights for unrestricted research re-use and analyses in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for free by Elsevier for as long as the COVID-19 resource centre remains active. |
spellingShingle | Article Serrano, Maria Martínez Rodríguez, David Navalpotro Palop, Nuria Tormo Arenas, Roberto Olmos Córdoba, Marta Moreno Mochón, Mª Dolores Ocete Cardona, Concepción Gimeno Comparison of commercial lateral flow immunoassays and ELISA for SARS-CoV-2 antibody detection |
title | Comparison of commercial lateral flow immunoassays and ELISA for SARS-CoV-2 antibody detection |
title_full | Comparison of commercial lateral flow immunoassays and ELISA for SARS-CoV-2 antibody detection |
title_fullStr | Comparison of commercial lateral flow immunoassays and ELISA for SARS-CoV-2 antibody detection |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of commercial lateral flow immunoassays and ELISA for SARS-CoV-2 antibody detection |
title_short | Comparison of commercial lateral flow immunoassays and ELISA for SARS-CoV-2 antibody detection |
title_sort | comparison of commercial lateral flow immunoassays and elisa for sars-cov-2 antibody detection |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7323682/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32659710 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcv.2020.104529 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT serranomariamartinez comparisonofcommerciallateralflowimmunoassaysandelisaforsarscov2antibodydetection AT rodriguezdavidnavalpotro comparisonofcommerciallateralflowimmunoassaysandelisaforsarscov2antibodydetection AT palopnuriatormo comparisonofcommerciallateralflowimmunoassaysandelisaforsarscov2antibodydetection AT arenasrobertoolmos comparisonofcommerciallateralflowimmunoassaysandelisaforsarscov2antibodydetection AT cordobamartamoreno comparisonofcommerciallateralflowimmunoassaysandelisaforsarscov2antibodydetection AT mochonmadoloresocete comparisonofcommerciallateralflowimmunoassaysandelisaforsarscov2antibodydetection AT cardonaconcepciongimeno comparisonofcommerciallateralflowimmunoassaysandelisaforsarscov2antibodydetection |