Cargando…
Validation of a quantitative lateral flow immunoassay (LFIA)-based point-of-care (POC) rapid test for SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibodies
With the widespread use of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines, a rapid and reliable method to detect SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibodies (NAbs) is extremely important for monitoring vaccine effectiveness and immunity in the population. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the performan...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer Vienna
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8977564/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35377034 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00705-022-05422-w |
_version_ | 1784680793401982976 |
---|---|
author | Pieri, Massimo Nicolai, Eleonora Nuccetelli, Marzia Sarubbi, Serena Tomassetti, Flaminia Pelagalli, Martina Minieri, Marilena Terrinoni, Alessandro Bernardini, Sergio |
author_facet | Pieri, Massimo Nicolai, Eleonora Nuccetelli, Marzia Sarubbi, Serena Tomassetti, Flaminia Pelagalli, Martina Minieri, Marilena Terrinoni, Alessandro Bernardini, Sergio |
author_sort | Pieri, Massimo |
collection | PubMed |
description | With the widespread use of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines, a rapid and reliable method to detect SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibodies (NAbs) is extremely important for monitoring vaccine effectiveness and immunity in the population. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the performance of the RapiRead™ reader and the TestNOW™ COVID-19 NAb rapid point-of-care (POC) test for quantitative measurement of antibodies against the spike protein receptor-binding domain of severe respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in different biological matrices compared to chemiluminescence immunoassay (CLIA) methods. Ninety-four samples were collected and analyzed using a RapiRead™ reader and TestNOW™ COVID-19 NAb kits for detecting neutralizing antibodies, and then using two CLIAs. The data were compared statistically using the Kruskal-Wallis test for more than two groups or the Mann-Whitney test for two groups. Specificity and sensitivity were evaluated using a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. Good correlation was observed between the rapid lateral flow immunoassay (LFIA) test system and both CLIA methods. RapiRead™ reader/TestNOW™ COVID-19 NAb vs. Maglumi: correlation coefficient (r) = 0.728 for all patients; r = 0.841 for vaccinated patients. RapiRead™ reader/TestNOW™ COVID-19 NAb vs. Mindray: r = 0.6394 in all patients; r = 0.8724 in vaccinated patients. The time stability of the POC serological test was also assessed considering two times of reading, 12 and 14 minutes. The data revealed no significant differences. The use of a RapiRead™ reader and TestNOW™ COVID-19 NAb assay is a quantitative, rapid, and valid method for detecting SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibodies and could be a useful tool for screening studies of SARS-CoV-2 infection and assessing the efficacy of vaccines in a non-laboratory context. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8977564 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Springer Vienna |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-89775642022-04-04 Validation of a quantitative lateral flow immunoassay (LFIA)-based point-of-care (POC) rapid test for SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibodies Pieri, Massimo Nicolai, Eleonora Nuccetelli, Marzia Sarubbi, Serena Tomassetti, Flaminia Pelagalli, Martina Minieri, Marilena Terrinoni, Alessandro Bernardini, Sergio Arch Virol Original Article With the widespread use of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines, a rapid and reliable method to detect SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibodies (NAbs) is extremely important for monitoring vaccine effectiveness and immunity in the population. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the performance of the RapiRead™ reader and the TestNOW™ COVID-19 NAb rapid point-of-care (POC) test for quantitative measurement of antibodies against the spike protein receptor-binding domain of severe respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in different biological matrices compared to chemiluminescence immunoassay (CLIA) methods. Ninety-four samples were collected and analyzed using a RapiRead™ reader and TestNOW™ COVID-19 NAb kits for detecting neutralizing antibodies, and then using two CLIAs. The data were compared statistically using the Kruskal-Wallis test for more than two groups or the Mann-Whitney test for two groups. Specificity and sensitivity were evaluated using a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. Good correlation was observed between the rapid lateral flow immunoassay (LFIA) test system and both CLIA methods. RapiRead™ reader/TestNOW™ COVID-19 NAb vs. Maglumi: correlation coefficient (r) = 0.728 for all patients; r = 0.841 for vaccinated patients. RapiRead™ reader/TestNOW™ COVID-19 NAb vs. Mindray: r = 0.6394 in all patients; r = 0.8724 in vaccinated patients. The time stability of the POC serological test was also assessed considering two times of reading, 12 and 14 minutes. The data revealed no significant differences. The use of a RapiRead™ reader and TestNOW™ COVID-19 NAb assay is a quantitative, rapid, and valid method for detecting SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibodies and could be a useful tool for screening studies of SARS-CoV-2 infection and assessing the efficacy of vaccines in a non-laboratory context. Springer Vienna 2022-04-02 2022 /pmc/articles/PMC8977564/ /pubmed/35377034 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00705-022-05422-w Text en © The Author(s) 2022, corrected publication 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Original Article Pieri, Massimo Nicolai, Eleonora Nuccetelli, Marzia Sarubbi, Serena Tomassetti, Flaminia Pelagalli, Martina Minieri, Marilena Terrinoni, Alessandro Bernardini, Sergio Validation of a quantitative lateral flow immunoassay (LFIA)-based point-of-care (POC) rapid test for SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibodies |
title | Validation of a quantitative lateral flow immunoassay (LFIA)-based point-of-care (POC) rapid test for SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibodies |
title_full | Validation of a quantitative lateral flow immunoassay (LFIA)-based point-of-care (POC) rapid test for SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibodies |
title_fullStr | Validation of a quantitative lateral flow immunoassay (LFIA)-based point-of-care (POC) rapid test for SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibodies |
title_full_unstemmed | Validation of a quantitative lateral flow immunoassay (LFIA)-based point-of-care (POC) rapid test for SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibodies |
title_short | Validation of a quantitative lateral flow immunoassay (LFIA)-based point-of-care (POC) rapid test for SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibodies |
title_sort | validation of a quantitative lateral flow immunoassay (lfia)-based point-of-care (poc) rapid test for sars-cov-2 neutralizing antibodies |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8977564/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35377034 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00705-022-05422-w |
work_keys_str_mv | AT pierimassimo validationofaquantitativelateralflowimmunoassaylfiabasedpointofcarepocrapidtestforsarscov2neutralizingantibodies AT nicolaieleonora validationofaquantitativelateralflowimmunoassaylfiabasedpointofcarepocrapidtestforsarscov2neutralizingantibodies AT nuccetellimarzia validationofaquantitativelateralflowimmunoassaylfiabasedpointofcarepocrapidtestforsarscov2neutralizingantibodies AT sarubbiserena validationofaquantitativelateralflowimmunoassaylfiabasedpointofcarepocrapidtestforsarscov2neutralizingantibodies AT tomassettiflaminia validationofaquantitativelateralflowimmunoassaylfiabasedpointofcarepocrapidtestforsarscov2neutralizingantibodies AT pelagallimartina validationofaquantitativelateralflowimmunoassaylfiabasedpointofcarepocrapidtestforsarscov2neutralizingantibodies AT minierimarilena validationofaquantitativelateralflowimmunoassaylfiabasedpointofcarepocrapidtestforsarscov2neutralizingantibodies AT terrinonialessandro validationofaquantitativelateralflowimmunoassaylfiabasedpointofcarepocrapidtestforsarscov2neutralizingantibodies AT bernardinisergio validationofaquantitativelateralflowimmunoassaylfiabasedpointofcarepocrapidtestforsarscov2neutralizingantibodies |