Background: The 2019 coronavirus (COVID-19) epidemic, required the development of different diagnostic tests. While reverse transcriptase real-time PCR (RT-PCR) remains the first-line test of choice in acute infection diagnosis, anti-N antibodies serological assays provide a valuable tool to differentiate natural SARS-CoV-2 immunological response from that induced by vaccination, thus the goal of our study was to evaluate three serological tests agreement for these antibodies detection. Methods: Three anti-N different tests were examined in 74 sera from patients referred or not COVID infection: immunochromatographic rapid test (Panbio™ COVID-19 IgG/IgM Rapid Test Device Abbott, Germany), ELISA kit (NovaLisa® SARS-CoV-2 IgG and IgM NovaTech Immunodiagnostic GmbH, Germany) and ECLIA immunoassay (Elecsys® Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Roche Diagnostics, Manheim, Germany). Results: Qualitative comparison of the three analytical methods revealed a moderate agreement between ECLIA immunoassay and immunochromatographic rapid test (Cohen kappa coefficient κ = 0.564). Correlation analysis indicated weak positive correlation between total Ig (IgT) detected by ECLIA immunoassay and IgG by ELISA test (p < 0.0001), the analysis of ECLIA IgT and IgM ELISA detected, showed no statistical correlation. Conclusion: Comparison between of three analytical systems available for anti-N SARS-CoV-2 IgG and IgM antibodies showed a general agreement when compared to detect total and G class immunoglobulins, while doubtful or discordant results have been highlighted for IgT and IgM class. Anyway, all the tests examined provide reliable results to assess the serological status of SARS-CoV-2 infected patients.
Anti-N SARS-CoV-2 assays for evaluation of natural viral infection / Gaeta, Aurelia; Angeloni, Antonio; Napoli, Anna; Pucci, Beatrice; Cinti, Lilia; Roberto, Piergiorgio; Colaiacovo, Flavia; Berardelli, Elena; Farina, Antonella; Antonelli, Guido; Anastasi, Emanuela. - In: JOURNAL OF IMMUNOLOGICAL METHODS. - ISSN 0022-1759. - 518:(2023). [10.1016/j.jim.2023.113486]
Anti-N SARS-CoV-2 assays for evaluation of natural viral infection
Aurelia GaetaPrimo
Writing – Original Draft Preparation
;Antonio Angeloni
Secondo
Supervision
;Anna NapoliResources
;Beatrice PucciFormal Analysis
;Lilia CintiMethodology
;Roberto PiergiorgioMembro del Collaboration Group
;Flavia ColaiacovoWriting – Original Draft Preparation
;Elena BerardelliValidation
;Antonella FarinaWriting – Review & Editing
;Guido AntonelliPenultimo
Supervision
;Emanuela AnastasiUltimo
Conceptualization
2023
Abstract
Background: The 2019 coronavirus (COVID-19) epidemic, required the development of different diagnostic tests. While reverse transcriptase real-time PCR (RT-PCR) remains the first-line test of choice in acute infection diagnosis, anti-N antibodies serological assays provide a valuable tool to differentiate natural SARS-CoV-2 immunological response from that induced by vaccination, thus the goal of our study was to evaluate three serological tests agreement for these antibodies detection. Methods: Three anti-N different tests were examined in 74 sera from patients referred or not COVID infection: immunochromatographic rapid test (Panbio™ COVID-19 IgG/IgM Rapid Test Device Abbott, Germany), ELISA kit (NovaLisa® SARS-CoV-2 IgG and IgM NovaTech Immunodiagnostic GmbH, Germany) and ECLIA immunoassay (Elecsys® Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Roche Diagnostics, Manheim, Germany). Results: Qualitative comparison of the three analytical methods revealed a moderate agreement between ECLIA immunoassay and immunochromatographic rapid test (Cohen kappa coefficient κ = 0.564). Correlation analysis indicated weak positive correlation between total Ig (IgT) detected by ECLIA immunoassay and IgG by ELISA test (p < 0.0001), the analysis of ECLIA IgT and IgM ELISA detected, showed no statistical correlation. Conclusion: Comparison between of three analytical systems available for anti-N SARS-CoV-2 IgG and IgM antibodies showed a general agreement when compared to detect total and G class immunoglobulins, while doubtful or discordant results have been highlighted for IgT and IgM class. Anyway, all the tests examined provide reliable results to assess the serological status of SARS-CoV-2 infected patients.File | Dimensione | Formato | |
---|---|---|---|
Gaeta_Anti-N SARS_2023.pdf
accesso aperto
Note: OPEN ACCESS: 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.
Tipologia:
Versione editoriale (versione pubblicata con il layout dell'editore)
Licenza:
Tutti i diritti riservati (All rights reserved)
Dimensione
590.86 kB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
590.86 kB | Adobe PDF |
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.