Diagnostic performance of seven rapid IgG/IgM antibody tests and the Euroimmun IgA/IgG ELISA in COVID-19 patients

Construction of AlGaN/GaN high-electron-mobility transistor-based biosensor for ultrasensitive detection of SARS-CoV-2 spike proteins and virions

The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the need for rapid and sensitive detection of SARS-CoV-2. Here, we report an ultrasensitive SARS-CoV-2 immunosensor by integration of an AlGaN/GaN high-electron-mobility transistor (HEMT) and anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike protein antibody. The AlGaN/GaN HEMT immunosensor has demonstrated the capability to detect SARS-CoV-2 spike proteins at an impressively low concentration of 10-22 M. The sensor was also applied to pseudoviruses and SARS-CoV-2 ΔN virions that display the Spike proteins with a single virion particle sensitivity. These features validate the potential of AlGaN/GaN HEMT biosensors for point of care tests targeting SARS-CoV-2. This research not only provides the first HEMT biosensing platform for ultrasensitive and label-free detection of SARS-CoV-2.

From Detection to Protection: Antibodies and Their Crucial Role in Diagnosing and Combatting SARS-CoV-2

Understanding the antibody response to SARS-CoV-2, the virus responsible for COVID-19, is crucial to comprehending disease progression and the significance of vaccine and therapeutic development. The emergence of highly contagious variants poses a significant challenge to humoral immunity, underscoring the necessity of grasping the intricacies of specific antibodies. This review emphasizes the pivotal role of antibodies in shaping immune responses and their implications for diagnosing, preventing, and treating SARS-CoV-2 infection. It delves into the kinetics and characteristics of the antibody response to SARS-CoV-2 and explores current antibody-based diagnostics, discussing their strengths, clinical utility, and limitations. Furthermore, we underscore the therapeutic potential of SARS-CoV-2-specific antibodies, discussing various antibody-based therapies such as monoclonal antibodies, polyclonal antibodies, anti-cytokines, convalescent plasma, and hyperimmunoglobulin-based therapies. Moreover, we offer insights into antibody responses to SARS-CoV-2 vaccines, emphasizing the significance of neutralizing antibodies in order to confer immunity to SARS-CoV-2, along with emerging variants of concern (VOCs) and circulating Omicron subvariants. We also highlight challenges in the field, such as the risks of antibody-dependent enhancement (ADE) for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies, and shed light on the challenges associated with the original antigenic sin (OAS) effect and long COVID. Overall, this review intends to provide valuable insights, which are crucial to advancing sensitive diagnostic tools, identifying efficient antibody-based therapeutics, and developing effective vaccines to combat the evolving threat of SARS-CoV-2 variants on a global scale.

The impact of inaccurate assumptions about antibody test accuracy on the parametrisation and results of infectious disease models of epidemics

The parametrisation of infectious disease models is often done based on epidemiological studies that use diagnostic and serology tests to establish disease prevalence or seroprevalence in the population being modelled. During outbreaks of an emerging infectious disease, tests are often used, both for disease control and epidemiological studies, before studies evaluating their accuracy in the population have concluded, with assumptions made about accuracy parameters like sensitivity and specificity. In this simulation study, we simulated such an outbreak, based on the case study of COVID-19, and found that inaccurate parametrisation of infectious disease models due to assumptions about antibody test accuracy in a seroprevalence study can cause modelling results that inform public health decisions to be inaccurate; for example, in our simulation setup, assuming that antibody test specificity was 0.99 instead of 0.90 when it was in fact 0.90 led to an average relative difference of 0.78 in model-projected peak hospitalisations, even when test sensitivity and all other parameters were accurately characterised. We therefore suggest that methods to speed up test evaluation studies are vitally important in the public health response to an emerging outbreak.

Perspectives on SARS-CoV-2 Cases in Zoological Institutions

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infections in a zoological institution were initially reported in March 2020. Since then, at least 94 peer-reviewed cases have been reported in zoos worldwide. Among the affected animals, nonhuman primates, carnivores, and artiodactyls appear to be most susceptible to infection, with the Felidae family accounting for the largest number of reported cases. Clinical symptoms tend to be mild across taxa; although, certain species exhibit increased susceptibility to disease. A variety of diagnostic tools are available, allowing for initial diagnostics and for the monitoring of infectious risk. Whilst supportive therapy proves sufficient in most cases, monoclonal antibody therapy has emerged as a promising additional treatment option. Effective transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in some species raises concerns over potential spillover and the formation of reservoirs. The occurrence of SARS-CoV-2 in a variety of animal species may contribute to the emergence of variants of concern due to altered viral evolutionary constraints. Consequently, this review emphasizes the need for effective biosecurity measures and surveillance strategies to prevent and control SARS-CoV-2 infections in zoological institutions.

Seroprevalence Of SARS-COV-2 infection in asymptomatic indigenous from the largest Brazilian periurban area

This study assessed the seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 in 496 asymptomatic individuals from Mato Grosso do Sul, located in Dourados, the largest periurban indigenous area in Brazil, from January 25 to February 4, 2021. The volunteers participated before receiving their first dose of the CoronaVac inactivated vaccine. For screening, blood samples were collected and analyzed using SARS-CoV-2 rapid tests and the enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). We observed varying trends in total anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies across different variables. Seropositivity among the participants tested was 63.70% (316/496) using the rapid test and 52.82% (262/496) were positive using the ELISA method. The majority of participants identified with the Guarani-Kaiowá ethnic group, with 66.15% (217/328), and other ethnic groups with 58.84% (193/328). The median age of the subjects was 30.5 years, with 79.57% (261/328) being femaleThis research showed the elevated seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in asymptomatic Brazilians. The findings indicate a high seropositivity rate among the asymptomatic indigenous population of Midwest Brazil. This underscores the overlooked status of these communities and underscores the need for targeted national initiatives that emphasize the protection of vulnerable ethnic groups in the fight against COVID-19.

Direct immunoassay on a polyester microwell plate for colorimetric detection of the spike protein in swab and saliva samples

This study presents the development of a polyester microplate for detecting the S-protein of the SARS-CoV-2 virus in saliva and nasopharyngeal swab samples using direct enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) technology. The polyester microplate was designed to contain 96 zones with a 3 mm diameter each, and a volume of 2-3 μL. The experimental conditions including reagent concentration and reaction time were optimized. The microplate image was digitized and analyzed using graphical software. The linear range obtained between protein S concentrations and pixel intensity was 0-10 μg mL-1, with a correlation coefficient of 0.99 and a limit of detection of 0.44 μg mL-1. The developed methodology showed satisfactory intraplate and interplate repeatability with RSD values lower than 7.8%. The results achieved through immunoassay performed on polyester microplates were consistent with those of the RT-PCR method and showed a sensitivity of 100% and 90% and specificity of 85.71% and 100% for saliva and nasopharyngeal samples, respectively. The proposed direct immunoassay on polyester microplates emerges as an alternative to conventional immunoassays performed on commercial polystyrene plates, given the low cost of the device, low consumption of samples and reagents, lower waste generation, and shorter analysis time. Moreover, the immunoassay has shown great potential for diagnosing COVID-19 with precision and accuracy.

A novel highly specific biotinylated MAC-ELISA for detection of anti-SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid antigen IgM antibodies during the acute phase of COVID-19

The gold standard for diagnosing COVID-19 in the acute phase is RT-qPCR. However, this molecular technique can yield false-negative results when nasopharyngeal swab collection is not conducted during viremia. To mitigate this challenge, the enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) identifies anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgM antibodies in the initial weeks after symptom onset, facilitating early COVID-19 diagnosis. This study introduces a novel and highly specific IgM antibody capture ELISA (MAC-ELISA), which utilizes biotinylated recombinant SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid (N) antigen produced in plants. Our biotinylated approach streamlines the procedure by eliminating the requirement for an anti-N-conjugated antibody, circumventing the need for peroxidase-labeled antigens, and preventing cross-reactivity with IgM autoantibodies such as rheumatoid factor. Performance evaluation of the assay involved assessing sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and accuracy using 682 RT-qPCR-positive samples, categorized by weeks relative to symptoms onset. Negative controls included 205 pre-pandemic serum samples and 46 serum samples from patients diagnosed with other diseases. Based on a cut-off of 0.087 and ROC curve analysis, the highest sensitivity of 81.2% was observed in the 8-14 days post-symptom (dps) group (2nd week), followed by sensitivities of 73.8% and 68.37% for the 1-7 dps (1st week) and 15-21 dps groups (3rd week), respectively. Specificity was consistently 100% across all groups. This newly developed biotinylated N-MAC-ELISA offers a more streamlined and cost-effective alternative to molecular diagnostics. It enables simultaneous testing of multiple samples and effectively identifies individuals with false-negative results.

Multiplexed detection of viral antigen and RNA using nanopore sensing and encoded molecular probes

We report on single-molecule nanopore sensing combined with position-encoded DNA molecular probes, with chemistry tuned to simultaneously identify various antigen proteins and multiple RNA gene fragments of SARS-CoV-2 with high sensitivity and selectivity. We show that this sensing strategy can directly detect spike (S) and nucleocapsid (N) proteins in unprocessed human saliva. Moreover, our approach enables the identification of RNA fragments from patient samples using nasal/throat swabs, enabling the identification of critical mutations such as D614G, G446S, or Y144del among viral variants. In particular, it can detect and discriminate between SARS-CoV-2 lineages of wild-type B.1.1.7 (Alpha), B.1.617.2 (Delta), and B.1.1.539 (Omicron) within a single measurement without the need for nucleic acid sequencing. The sensing strategy of the molecular probes is easily adaptable to other viral targets and diseases and can be expanded depending on the application required.

Development and Analytical Evaluation of a Point-of-Care Electrochemical Biosensor for Rapid and Accurate SARS-CoV-2 Detection

The COVID-19 pandemic has underscored the critical need for rapid and accurate screening and diagnostic methods for potential respiratory viruses. Existing COVID-19 diagnostic approaches face limitations either in terms of turnaround time or accuracy. In this study, we present an electrochemical biosensor that offers nearly instantaneous and precise SARS-CoV-2 detection, suitable for point-of-care and environmental monitoring applications. The biosensor employs a stapled hACE-2 N-terminal alpha helix peptide to functionalize an in situ grown polypyrrole conductive polymer on a nitrocellulose membrane backbone through a chemical process. We assessed the biosensor's analytical performance using heat-inactivated omicron and delta variants of the SARS-CoV-2 virus in artificial saliva (AS) and nasal swab (NS) samples diluted in a strong ionic solution, as well as clinical specimens with known Ct values. Virus identification was achieved through electrochemical impedance spectroscopy (EIS) and frequency analyses. The assay demonstrated a limit of detection (LoD) of 40 TCID50/mL, with 95% sensitivity and 100% specificity. Notably, the biosensor exhibited no cross-reactivity when tested against the influenza virus. The entire testing process using the biosensor takes less than a minute. In summary, our biosensor exhibits promising potential in the battle against pandemic respiratory viruses, offering a platform for the development of rapid, compact, portable, and point-of-care devices capable of multiplexing various viruses. The biosensor has the capacity to significantly bolster our readiness and response to future viral outbreaks.

Microfluidic-based technologies for diagnosis, prevention, and treatment of COVID-19: recent advances and future directions

The COVID-19 pandemic has posed significant challenges to existing healthcare systems around the world. The urgent need for the development of diagnostic and therapeutic strategies for COVID-19 has boomed the demand for new technologies that can improve current healthcare approaches, moving towards more advanced, digitalized, personalized, and patient-oriented systems. Microfluidic-based technologies involve the miniaturization of large-scale devices and laboratory-based procedures, enabling complex chemical and biological operations that are conventionally performed at the macro-scale to be carried out on the microscale or less. The advantages microfluidic systems offer such as rapid, low-cost, accurate, and on-site solutions make these tools extremely useful and effective in the fight against COVID-19. In particular, microfluidic-assisted systems are of great interest in different COVID-19-related domains, varying from direct and indirect detection of COVID-19 infections to drug and vaccine discovery and their targeted delivery. Here, we review recent advances in the use of microfluidic platforms to diagnose, treat or prevent COVID-19. We start by summarizing recent microfluidic-based diagnostic solutions applicable to COVID-19. We then highlight the key roles microfluidics play in developing COVID-19 vaccines and testing how vaccine candidates perform, with a focus on RNA-delivery technologies and nano-carriers. Next, microfluidic-based efforts devoted to assessing the efficacy of potential COVID-19 drugs, either repurposed or new, and their targeted delivery to infected sites are summarized. We conclude by providing future perspectives and research directions that are critical to effectively prevent or respond to future pandemics.

Evaluation of eight lateral flow tests for the detection of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in a vaccinated population

BACKGROUND

Rapid determination of an individual's antibody status can be beneficial in understanding an individual's immune response to SARS-CoV-2 and for initiation of therapies that are only deemed effective in sero-negative individuals. Antibody lateral flow tests (LFTs) have potential to address this need as a rapid, point of care test.

METHODS

Here we present a proof-of-concept evaluation of eight LFT brands using sera from 95 vaccinated individuals to determine sensitivity for detecting vaccination generated antibodies. Samples were analysed on eight different brands of antibody LFT and an automated chemiluminescent microparticle immunoassay (CMIA) that identifies anti-spike antibodies which was used as our reference standard.

RESULTS

All 95 (100%) participants tested positive for anti-spike antibodies by the chemiluminescent microparticle immunoassay (CMIA) reference standard post-dose two of their SARS-CoV-2 vaccine: BNT162b2 (Pfizer/BioNTech, n = 60), AZD1222 (AstraZeneca, n = 31), mRNA-1273 (Moderna, n = 2) and Undeclared Vaccine Brand (n = 2). Sensitivity increased from dose one to dose two in six out of eight LFTs with three tests achieving 100% sensitivity at dose two in detecting anti-spike antibodies.

CONCLUSIONS

These tests are demonstrated to be highly sensitive to detect raised antibody levels in vaccinated individuals. RDTs are low cost and rapid alternatives to ELISA based systems.

Reliability of antibody tests for COVID-19 diagnosis

Objective: The reverse transcription–polymerase chain reaction test (RT-PCR) is the gold standard for the diagnosis of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), and antibody tests are useful as supplemental tools for diagnosis, for measuring the population’s immunity levels, and for checking infection in asymptomatic contacts. This study aimed to evaluate the reliability of five commercial antibody detection test kits. Materials and Methods: The reliability of the Colloidal Gold COVID-19 IgG/IgM Rapid Test Kit, Antibody Rapid Test Hotgen, Beijing Hotgen Biotech Co., Ltd., China), Abbott Chemiluminescent Microparticle Immunoassay (Illinois, USA), Roche Electrochemiluminescence Immunoassay (Roche Diagnostics, Switzerland), Siemens Chemiluminescence (Munich, Germany), and Euroimmun ELISA (Lübeck, Germany) for COVID-19 diagnosis was studied. The antibody-negative group included 50 sera from 2018, and the antibody-positive group included 98 patients with positive RT-PCR results from whom blood samples had been collected 3–9 weeks after hospital discharge. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS version 23.0 (IBM Corporation, Armonk, NY, USA). The antibody tests’ validity and intra-assay reproducibility were examined, and the Cohen’s kappa coefficients were obtained. The disease prevalence was pegged at 10%. Results: The antibody tests’ sensitivity (69.12–72.46%) and positive predictive values (42.44–100.0%) were low, and their specificity (89.58–100%) and negative predictive values (96.31–97.03%) were high. Their accuracy rates varied from 87.54% to 97.25%, and their intra-assay coefficients of variation varied from 1% to 10%. Conclusion: The agreement between the results of the antibody detection test kits was higher when the kits were classified according to the targeted antigens. The time of blood sample collection, targeted antigens, and antibody types affected the results. Serological tests were found to be useful, and the commercial kits were found to be largely reliable, although, some parameters need to be improved.

COVID-19 in a Pre-Omicron Era: A Cross-Sectional Immuno-Epidemical and Genomic Evaluation

The seventh human coronavirus was discovered and reported primarily in Wuhan, China. After intense seasons with repercussions in all areas of humanity, the pandemic demonstrates a new perspective. In Brazil, the pandemic concept had impacts in vast areas, including healthcare hospitals. This present study aims to describe and synthesize data from a determined period from the year 2021 that correlate the symptoms of passive and/or active patients for COVID-19 and their respective results of IgG/IgM serological tests in hospitals in the city of Cruzeiro, São Paulo, Brazil. The form had been applied to 333 people and obtained conclusive results and several symptoms were presented; in addition, asymptomatic cases were also analyzed and directed in the genomic study of variants of concern, as well as vaccination data in the study region.

Patient-derived monoclonal antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid protein N-terminal and C-terminal domains cross-react with their counterparts of SARS-CoV, but not other human betacoronaviruses

Introduction

SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid (N) protein plays a key role in multiple stages of the viral life cycle such as viral replication and assembly. This protein is more conserved than the Spike protein of the virus and can induce both humoral and cell-mediated immune responses, thereby becoming a target for clinical diagnosis and vaccine development. However, the immunogenic characteristics of this protein during natural infection are still not completely understood.

Methods

Patient-derived monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) against SARS-CoV-2 N protein were generated from memory B cells in the PBMCs using the antigen-specific B cell approach. For epitope mapping of the isolated hmAbs, a panel of series-truncated N proteins were used , which covered the N-terminal domain (NTD, aa 46-174 ) and C-terminal domain (CTD, aa 245-364 ), as well as the flanking regions of NTD and CTD. NTD- or CTD-specific Abs in the plasma from COVID-19 patients were also tested by ELISA method. Cross-binding of hmAbs or plasma Abs in COVID-19 patients to other human β-CoV N proteins was determined using the capture ELISA.

Results

We isolated five N-specific monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) from memory B cells in the peripheral blood of two convalescent COVID-19 patients. Epitope mapping revealed that three of the patient-derived mAbs (N3, N5 and N31) targeted the C-terminal domain (CTD), whereas two of the mAbs (N83 and 3B7) targeted the N-terminal domain (NTD) of SARS-CoV-2 N protein. All five patient-derived mAbs were cross-reactive to the N protein of SARS-CoV but showed little to no cross-reactivity to the N proteins of other human beta coronaviruses (β-CoVs). We also tested 52 plasma samples collected from convalescent COVID-19 patients for Abs against the N proteins of human β-CoVs and found that 78.8% of plasma samples showed detectable Abs against the N proteins of SARS-CoV-2 and SARS-CoV. No plasma sample had cross-reactive Abs to the N protein of MERS-CoV. Cross-reactive Abs to the N proteins of OC43 and HKU1 were detected in 36.5% (19/52) and 19.2% (10/52) of plasma samples, respectively.

Discussion

These results suggest that natural SARS-CoV-2 infection elicits cross-reactive Abs to the N protein of SARS-CoV and that the five patient-derived mAbs to SARS-CoV-2 N protein NTD and CTD cross-react with their counterparts of SARS-CoV, but not other human β-CoVs. Thus, these five patient-derived mAbs can potentially be used for developing the next generation of COVID-19 At-Home Test kits for rapid and specific screening of SARS-CoV-2 infection.

PCR combined with serologic testing improves the yield and efficiency of SARS-CoV-2 infection hunting: A study in 40,689 consecutive overseas arrivals

Background

The global epidemiological situation of COVID-19 remains serious. The rapid hunting of SARS-CoV-2 infection is the key means for preventing transmission.

Methods

A total of 40,689 consecutive overseas arrivals were screened for SARS-CoV-2 infection based on PCR and serologic testing. The yield and efficiency of different screening algorithms were evaluated.

Result

Among the 40,689 consecutive overseas arrivals, 56 (0.14%) subjects were confirmed to have SARS-CoV-2 infection. The asymptomatic rate was 76.8%. When the algorithm based on PCR alone was used, the identification yield of a single round of PCR (PCR1) was only 39.3% (95% CI: 26.1-52.5%). It took at least four rounds of PCR to achieve a yield of 92.9% (95% CI: 85.9-99.8%). Fortunately, an algorithm based on a single round of PCR combined with a single round of serologic testing (PCR1+ Ab1) greatly improved the screening yield to 98.2% (95% CI: 94.6-100.0%) and required 42,299 PCR and 40,689 serologic tests that cost 6,052,855 yuan. By achieving a similar yield, the cost of PCR1+ Ab1 was 39.2% of that of four rounds of PCR. For hunting one case in PCR1+ Ab1, 769 PCR and 740 serologic tests were required, costing 110,052 yuan, which was 63.0% of that of the PCR1 algorithm.

Conclusion

Comparing an algorithm based on PCR alone, PCR combined with a serologic testing algorithm greatly improved the yield and efficiency of the identification of SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Label-free impedimetric immunosensor for point-of-care detection of COVID-19 antibodies

The COVID-19 pandemic has posed enormous challenges for existing diagnostic tools to detect and monitor pathogens. Therefore, there is a need to develop point-of-care (POC) devices to perform fast, accurate, and accessible diagnostic methods to detect infections and monitor immune responses. Devices most amenable to miniaturization and suitable for POC applications are biosensors based on electrochemical detection. We have developed an impedimetric immunosensor based on an interdigitated microelectrode array (IMA) to detect and monitor SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in human serum. Conjugation chemistry was applied to functionalize and covalently immobilize the spike protein (S-protein) of SARS-CoV-2 on the surface of the IMA to serve as the recognition layer and specifically bind anti-spike antibodies. Antibodies bound to the S-proteins in the recognition layer result in an increase in capacitance and a consequent change in the impedance of the system. The impedimetric immunosensor is label-free and uses non-Faradaic impedance with low nonperturbing AC voltage for detection. The sensitivity of a capacitive immunosensor can be enhanced by simply tuning the ionic strength of the sample solution. The device exhibits an LOD of 0.4 BAU/ml, as determined from the standard curve using WHO IS for anti-SARS-CoV-2 immunoglobulins; this LOD is similar to the corresponding LODs reported for all validated and established commercial assays, which range from 0.41 to 4.81 BAU/ml. The proof-of-concept biosensor has been demonstrated to detect anti-spike antibodies in sera from patients infected with COVID-19 within 1 h. Photolithographically microfabricated interdigitated microelectrode array sensor chips & label-free impedimetric detection of COVID-19 antibody.

An Evaluation of Serological Tests to Determine Postvaccinal Immunity to SARS-CoV-2 by mRNA Vaccines

BACKGROUND

The duration of the protective efficacy of vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 is unknown. Thus, an evaluation of the clinical performance of available tests is required.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the clinical performance of LFIA immunoassay compared to ELIA and CLIA immunoassays available in Europe for the detection of IgG antibodies generated by mRNA vaccines against SARS-CoV-2.

METHODS

Two automated immunoassays (the EUROIMMUN anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG S1 ELISA and the LIAISON de Diasorin anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG S1/S2 test) and a lateral flow immunoassay (the Livzon LFIA anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG S test) were tested. We analyzed 300 samples distributed in three groups: 100 subjects aged over 18 years and under 45 years, 100 subjects aged between 45 and 65 years, and 100 subjects aged over 65 years. The samples were collected before vaccination; at 21 days; and then at 1, 2, 3, and 6 months after vaccination. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, positive probability quotient, negative probability quotient, and concordance (kappa index) were calculated for each serological test.

RESULTS

The maximum sensitivity values for IgG were 98.7%, 98.1%, and 97.8% for the EUROIMMUN ELISA, Abbott CLIA, and Livzon LFIA tests, respectively, and the maximum specificity values for IgG were 99.4%, 99.9%%, and 98.4% for the ELISA, CLIA, and LFIA tests, respectively, at the third month after vaccination, representing a decrease in the antibody levels after the sixth month. The best agreement was observed between the ELISA and CLIA tests at 100% (k = 1.00). The agreement between the ELIA, CLIA, and LFIA tests was 99% (k = 0.964) at the second and third month after vaccination. Seroconversion was faster and more durable in the younger age groups.

CONCLUSION

Our study examined the equivalent and homogeneous clinical performance for IgG of three immunoassays after vaccination and found LFIA to be the most cost-effective, reliable, and accurate for routine use in population seroconversion and seroprevalence studies.

Mass spectrometry for metabolomics analysis: Applications in neonatal and cancer screening

Chemical analysis by analytical instrumentation has played a major role in disease diagnosis, which is a necessary step for disease treatment. While the treatment process often targets specific organs or compounds, the diagnostic step can occur through various means, including physical or chemical examination. Chemically, the genome may be evaluated to give information about potential genetic outcomes, the transcriptome to provide information about expression actively occurring, the proteome to offer insight on functions causing metabolite expression, or the metabolome to provide a picture of both past and ongoing physiological function in the body. Mass spectrometry (MS) has been elevated among other analytical instrumentation because it can be used to evaluate all four biological machineries of the body. In addition, MS provides enhanced sensitivity, selectivity, versatility, and speed for rapid turnaround time, qualities that are important for instance in clinical procedures involving the diagnosis of a pediatric patient in intensive care or a cancer patient undergoing surgery. In this review, we provide a summary of the use of MS to evaluate biomarkers for newborn screening and cancer diagnosis. As many reviews have recently appeared focusing on MS methods and instrumentation for metabolite analysis, we sought to describe the biological basis for many metabolomic and additional omics biomarkers used in newborn screening and how tandem MS methods have recently been applied, in comparison to traditional methods. Similar comparison is done for cancer screening, with emphasis on emerging MS approaches that allow biological fluids, tissues, and breath to be analyzed for the presence of diagnostic metabolites yielding insight for treatment options based on the understanding of prior and current physiological functions of the body.

Ultrarapid and ultrasensitive detection of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in COVID-19 patients via a 3D-printed nanomaterial-based biosensing platform

Rapid detection of antibodies during infection and after vaccination is critical for the control of infectious outbreaks, understanding immune response, and evaluating vaccine efficacy. In this manuscript, we evaluate a simple ultrarapid test for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in COVID-19 patients, which gives quantitative results (i.e., antibody concentration) in 10-12 s using a previously reported nanomaterial-based three-dimensional (3D)-printed biosensing platform. This platform consists of a micropillar array electrode fabricated via 3D printing of aerosolized gold nanoparticles and coated with nanoflakes of graphene and specific SARS-CoV-2 antigens, including spike S1, S1 receptor-binding domain (RBD) and nucleocapsid (N). The sensor works on the principle of electrochemical transduction, where the change of sensor impedance is realized by the interactions between the viral proteins attached to the sensor electrode surface and the antibodies. The three sensors were used to test samples from 17 COVID-19 patients and 3 patients without COVID-19. Unlike other serological tests, the 3D sensors quantitatively detected antibodies at a concentration as low as picomole within 10-12 s in human plasma samples. We found that the studied COVID-19 patients had higher concentrations of antibodies to spike proteins (RBD and S1) than to the N protein. These results demonstrate the enormous potential of the rapid antibody test platform for understanding patients' immunity, disease epidemiology and vaccine efficacy, and facilitating the control and prevention of infectious epidemics.

Antibody tests for identification of current and past infection with SARS-CoV-2

BACKGROUND

The diagnostic challenges associated with the COVID-19 pandemic resulted in rapid development of diagnostic test methods for detecting SARS-CoV-2 infection. Serology tests to detect the presence of antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 enable detection of past infection and may detect cases of SARS-CoV-2 infection that were missed by earlier diagnostic tests. Understanding the diagnostic accuracy of serology tests for SARS-CoV-2 infection may enable development of effective diagnostic and management pathways, inform public health management decisions and understanding of SARS-CoV-2 epidemiology.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the accuracy of antibody tests, firstly, to determine if a person presenting in the community, or in primary or secondary care has current SARS-CoV-2 infection according to time after onset of infection and, secondly, to determine if a person has previously been infected with SARS-CoV-2. Sources of heterogeneity investigated included: timing of test, test method, SARS-CoV-2 antigen used, test brand, and reference standard for non-SARS-CoV-2 cases.

SEARCH METHODS

The COVID-19 Open Access Project living evidence database from the University of Bern (which includes daily updates from PubMed and Embase and preprints from medRxiv and bioRxiv) was searched on 30 September 2020. We included additional publications from the Evidence for Policy and Practice Information and Co-ordinating Centre (EPPI-Centre) 'COVID-19: Living map of the evidence' and the Norwegian Institute of Public Health 'NIPH systematic and living map on COVID-19 evidence'. We did not apply language restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included test accuracy studies of any design that evaluated commercially produced serology tests, targeting IgG, IgM, IgA alone, or in combination. Studies must have provided data for sensitivity, that could be allocated to a predefined time period after onset of symptoms, or after a positive RT-PCR test. Small studies with fewer than 25 SARS-CoV-2 infection cases were excluded. We included any reference standard to define the presence or absence of SARS-CoV-2 (including reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction tests (RT-PCR), clinical diagnostic criteria, and pre-pandemic samples).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We use standard screening procedures with three reviewers. Quality assessment (using the QUADAS-2 tool) and numeric study results were extracted independently by two people. Other study characteristics were extracted by one reviewer and checked by a second. We present sensitivity and specificity with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for each test and, for meta-analysis, we fitted univariate random-effects logistic regression models for sensitivity by eligible time period and for specificity by reference standard group. Heterogeneity was investigated by including indicator variables in the random-effects logistic regression models. We tabulated results by test manufacturer and summarised results for tests that were evaluated in 200 or more samples and that met a modification of UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) target performance criteria.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 178 separate studies (described in 177 study reports, with 45 as pre-prints) providing 527 test evaluations. The studies included 64,688 samples including 25,724 from people with confirmed SARS-CoV-2; most compared the accuracy of two or more assays (102/178, 57%). Participants with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection were most commonly hospital inpatients (78/178, 44%), and pre-pandemic samples were used by 45% (81/178) to estimate specificity. Over two-thirds of studies recruited participants based on known SARS-CoV-2 infection status (123/178, 69%). All studies were conducted prior to the introduction of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines and present data for naturally acquired antibody responses. Seventy-nine percent (141/178) of studies reported sensitivity by week after symptom onset and 66% (117/178) for convalescent phase infection. Studies evaluated enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISA) (165/527; 31%), chemiluminescent assays (CLIA) (167/527; 32%) or lateral flow assays (LFA) (188/527; 36%). Risk of bias was high because of participant selection (172, 97%); application and interpretation of the index test (35, 20%); weaknesses in the reference standard (38, 21%); and issues related to participant flow and timing (148, 82%). We judged that there were high concerns about the applicability of the evidence related to participants in 170 (96%) studies, and about the applicability of the reference standard in 162 (91%) studies. Average sensitivities for current SARS-CoV-2 infection increased by week after onset for all target antibodies. Average sensitivity for the combination of either IgG or IgM was 41.1% in week one (95% CI 38.1 to 44.2; 103 evaluations; 3881 samples, 1593 cases), 74.9% in week two (95% CI 72.4 to 77.3; 96 evaluations, 3948 samples, 2904 cases) and 88.0% by week three after onset of symptoms (95% CI 86.3 to 89.5; 103 evaluations, 2929 samples, 2571 cases). Average sensitivity during the convalescent phase of infection (up to a maximum of 100 days since onset of symptoms, where reported) was 89.8% for IgG (95% CI 88.5 to 90.9; 253 evaluations, 16,846 samples, 14,183 cases), 92.9% for IgG or IgM combined (95% CI 91.0 to 94.4; 108 evaluations, 3571 samples, 3206 cases) and 94.3% for total antibodies (95% CI 92.8 to 95.5; 58 evaluations, 7063 samples, 6652 cases). Average sensitivities for IgM alone followed a similar pattern but were of a lower test accuracy in every time slot. Average specificities were consistently high and precise, particularly for pre-pandemic samples which provide the least biased estimates of specificity (ranging from 98.6% for IgM to 99.8% for total antibodies). Subgroup analyses suggested small differences in sensitivity and specificity by test technology however heterogeneity in study results, timing of sample collection, and smaller sample numbers in some groups made comparisons difficult. For IgG, CLIAs were the most sensitive (convalescent-phase infection) and specific (pre-pandemic samples) compared to both ELISAs and LFAs (P < 0.001 for differences across test methods). The antigen(s) used (whether from the Spike-protein or nucleocapsid) appeared to have some effect on average sensitivity in the first weeks after onset but there was no clear evidence of an effect during convalescent-phase infection. Investigations of test performance by brand showed considerable variation in sensitivity between tests, and in results between studies evaluating the same test. For tests that were evaluated in 200 or more samples, the lower bound of the 95% CI for sensitivity was 90% or more for only a small number of tests (IgG, n = 5; IgG or IgM, n = 1; total antibodies, n = 4). More test brands met the MHRA minimum criteria for specificity of 98% or above (IgG, n = 16; IgG or IgM, n = 5; total antibodies, n = 7). Seven assays met the specified criteria for both sensitivity and specificity. In a low-prevalence (2%) setting, where antibody testing is used to diagnose COVID-19 in people with symptoms but who have had a negative PCR test, we would anticipate that 1 (1 to 2) case would be missed and 8 (5 to 15) would be falsely positive in 1000 people undergoing IgG or IgM testing in week three after onset of SARS-CoV-2 infection. In a seroprevalence survey, where prevalence of prior infection is 50%, we would anticipate that 51 (46 to 58) cases would be missed and 6 (5 to 7) would be falsely positive in 1000 people having IgG tests during the convalescent phase (21 to 100 days post-symptom onset or post-positive PCR) of SARS-CoV-2 infection.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Some antibody tests could be a useful diagnostic tool for those in whom molecular- or antigen-based tests have failed to detect the SARS-CoV-2 virus, including in those with ongoing symptoms of acute infection (from week three onwards) or those presenting with post-acute sequelae of COVID-19. However, antibody tests have an increasing likelihood of detecting an immune response to infection as time since onset of infection progresses and have demonstrated adequate performance for detection of prior infection for sero-epidemiological purposes. The applicability of results for detection of vaccination-induced antibodies is uncertain.

Unspecific reactivity must be excluded in COVID-19 epidemiological analyses or virus tracing based on serologic testing: Analysis of 46,777 post-pandemic samples and 1,114 pre-pandemic samples

Background

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is the causative agent of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Serologic testing is complementary to nucleic acid screening to identify SARS-CoV-2. This study aimed to evaluate unspecific reactivity in SARS-CoV-2 serologic tests.

Materials and methods

Total anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies from 46,777 subjects who were screened for SARS-CoV-2 were retrospectively studied to evaluate the incidence and characteristics of the unspecific reactivity. A total of 1,114 pre-pandemic samples were also analysed to compare unspecific reactivity.

Results

The incidence of unspecific reactivity in anti-SARS-CoV-2 total antibody testing was 0.361% in 46,777 post-pandemic samples, similar to the incidence of 0.359% (4/1,114) in 1,114 pre-pandemic samples (p = 0.990). Subjects ≥ 19 years old had a 2.753-fold [95% confidence interval (CI), 1.130–6.706] higher probability of unspecific reactivity than subjects &lt; 19 years old (p = 0.026). There was no significant difference between the sexes. The unspecific reactivity was associated with 14 categories within the disease spectrum, with three tops being the skin and subcutaneous tissue diseases (0.93%), respiratory system diseases (0.78%) and neoplasms diseases (0.76%). The percentage of patients with a titer ≥ 13.87 cut-off index (COI) in the unspecific reactivity was 7.69%.

Conclusion

Our results suggest a unspecific reactivity incidence rate of 0.361% involving 14 categories on the disease spectrum. Unspecific reactivity needs to be excluded when performing serologic antibody testing in COVID-19 epidemiological analyses or virus tracing.

Simultaneous Rapid Nucleic Acid and Protein Detection in a Lateral Chromatography Chip for COVID-19 Diagnosis

In this work, we report a fast, portable, and economical microfluidic platform for the simultaneous detection of nucleic acid and proteins. Using SARS-CoV-2 as a target, this microfluidic chip enabled to simultaneously detect the SARS-CoV-2 RNA (N gene) antigen (or specific IgG antibody) with respective detection limits of 1 copy/μL for nucleic acid, 0.85 ng/mL for antigen, and 5.80 ng/mL for IgG within 30 min with high stability and anti-interference ability. The capability of this system in clinical applications was further evaluated using clinical samples, displaying 100% sensitivity and 100% specificity for COVID-19 diagnosis. These findings demonstrate the potential of this method to be used for the detection and subsequent control of pathogens.

The Post-Vaccination Quantitative Total Immunoglobulin Levels against SARS-CoV-2 in Healthcare Workers: A Multi-Centric Cohort Study in India

Healthcare workers (HCWs) in India received the AZD1222 and BBV152 vaccines from January 2021 onwards. The objective of this study was to compare the immune response (seropositivity rate and geometric mean titer (GMT), and 95% confidence interval (CI)] against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in HCWs who received these vaccines, after the first and second doses. Therefore, the total immunoglobulin (Ig) levels specific to SARS-CoV-2 were measured using quantitative enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). The study population of 133 HCWs consisted of two groups in which the immune response was measured for the AZD1222 and BBV152 vaccines. Data collection was performed from 6 February to 20 August 2021. Four weeks after the first and second dose, the odds ratio of seroconversion for AZD1222 and BBV152 vaccine was 10.3 times (95% CI: 4.5–23.7) and 15.9 times (95% CI: 6.3–39.9), respectively. The GMT was 6392.93 and 6398.82 U/mL for AZD1222 and 1480.47 and 990.38 U/mL for BBV152 after the first and second doses, respectively. Both vaccines elicited an immune response, but the seroconversion rate and GMT after each dose were significantly higher for AZD1222 than those for the BBV152 vaccine in this study.

Immunological response and temporal associations in myocarditis after COVID-19 vaccination using cardiac magnetic resonance imaging: An amplified T-cell response at the heart of it?

Introduction

Although myocarditis after anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccination is increasingly recognized, we have little data regarding the course of the disease and, consequently, the imaging findings, including the tissue-specific features. The purpose of this study is to describe the clinical, immunological, and cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) features of myocarditis after COVID-19 immunization in the acute phase and during follow-up. We aimed to compare the trajectory of the disease to myocarditis cases unrelated to COVID-19.

Methods

We assembled a CMR-based registry of potentially COVID-19 vaccination-related myocarditis cases. All patients who experienced new-onset chest pain and troponin elevation after COVID-19 vaccination and imaging confirming the clinical suspicion of acute myocarditis were enrolled in our study. Participants underwent routine laboratory testing and testing of their humoral and cellular immune response to COVID-19 vaccination. Clinical and CMR follow-up was performed after 3–6 months. We included two separate, sex- and age-matched control groups: (1) individuals with myocarditis unrelated to COVID-19 infection or vaccination confirmed by CMR and (2) volunteers with similar immunological exposure to SARS-CoV-2 compared to our group of interest (no difference in the number of doses, types and the time since anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccination and no difference in anti-nucleocapsid levels).

Results

We report 16 CMR-confirmed cases of myocarditis presenting (mean ± SD) 4 ± 2 days after administration of the anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccine (male patients, 22 ± 7 years), frequently with predisposing factors such as immune-mediated disease and previous myocarditis. We found that 75% received mRNA vaccines, and 25% received vector vaccines. During follow-up, CMR metrics depicting myocardial injury, including oedema and necrosis, decreased or completely disappeared. There was no difference regarding the CMR metrics between myocarditis after immunization and myocarditis unrelated to COVID-19. We found an increased T-cell response among myocarditis patients compared to matched controls (p < 0.01), while there was no difference in the humoral immune response.

Conclusion

In our cohort, myocarditis occurred after both mRNA and vector anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccination, frequently in individuals with predisposing factors. Upon follow-up, the myocardial injury had healed. Notably, an amplified cellular immune response was found in acute myocarditis cases occurring 4 days after COVID-19 vaccination.

Challenges in the Detection of SARS-CoV-2: Evolution of the Lateral Flow Immunoassay as a Valuable Tool for Viral Diagnosis

SARS-CoV-2 is an emerging infectious disease of zoonotic origin that caused the coronavirus disease in late 2019 and triggered a pandemic that has severely affected human health and caused millions of deaths. Early and massive diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infected patients is the key to preventing the spread of the virus and controlling the outbreak. Lateral flow immunoassays (LFIA) are the simplest biosensors. These devices are clinical diagnostic tools that can detect various analytes, including viruses and antibodies, with high sensitivity and specificity. This review summarizes the advantages, limitations, and evolution of LFIA during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic and the challenges of improving these diagnostic devices.

Thermodynamically coupled biosensors for detecting neutralizing antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 variants

We designed a protein biosensor that uses thermodynamic coupling for sensitive and rapid detection of neutralizing antibodies against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) variants in serum. The biosensor is a switchable, caged luciferase-receptor-binding domain (RBD) construct that detects serum-antibody interference with the binding of virus RBD to angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE-2) as a proxy for neutralization. Our coupling approach does not require target modification and can better distinguish sample-to-sample differences in analyte binding affinity and abundance than traditional competition-based assays.

Diagnosis Methods for COVID-19: A Systematic Review

At the end of 2019, the coronavirus appeared and spread extremely rapidly, causing millions of infections and deaths worldwide, and becoming a global pandemic. For this reason, it became urgent and essential to find adequate tests for an accurate and fast diagnosis of this disease. In the present study, a systematic review was performed in order to provide an overview of the COVID-19 diagnosis methods and tests already available, as well as their evolution in recent months. For this purpose, the Science Direct, PubMed, and Scopus databases were used to collect the data and three authors independently screened the references, extracted the main information, and assessed the quality of the included studies. After the analysis of the collected data, 34 studies reporting new methods to diagnose COVID-19 were selected. Although RT-PCR is the gold-standard method for COVID-19 diagnosis, it cannot fulfill all the requirements of this pandemic, being limited by the need for highly specialized equipment and personnel to perform the assays, as well as the long time to get the test results. To fulfill the limitations of this method, other alternatives, including biological and imaging analysis methods, also became commonly reported. The comparison of the different diagnosis tests allowed to understand the importance and potential of combining different techniques, not only to improve diagnosis but also for a further understanding of the virus, the disease, and their implications in humans.

SARS-CoV-2 Incidence, signs and symptoms and main risk factors for COVID-19 infection in Health Care Workers: A hospital-wide survey in Salvador, Brazil

Background

Brazil is the third country most affected by Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) in the world. Health care workers (HCWs) are at higher risk of infection. Despite the increasing numbers of studies on the topic, There are gaps in the knowledge of characteristics and risk factors for infection of HCWS. This information is important to design preventive strategies and to mitigate the disease impact. The objective of this study was to estimate the incidence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection, to identify factors associated, and to describe symptoms reported by healthcare workers at a tertiary hospital in Salvador, Brazil.

Methods

All HCWs were evaluated in a cross-sectional study conducted between May and September 2020, using self-administered questionnaires, and screening all participants for SARS-COV-2 IgG and IgM antibodies by rapid tests. Reactive IgG samples were retested by ELISA and IgM-positive test had a saliva sample retest by RT-PCR. Univariate associations were estimated by a non-adjusted incidence proportion ratio. Variables associated with COVID-19 incidence at p < 0.20 were selected for inclusion in a binary logistic regression model.

Results

A total of 2083 HCWs were included, mean age 41±10 years, 71.8% women, and 77.8% non-white. Of these, 271 (13.0%) and 25 (1.2%) HCWs tested positive for IgG and IgM SARS-CoV-2 antibodies, respectively, and three had a positive RT-PCR. Ancillary work [Odds Ratio (OR): 4.96], elementary education (OR: 2.91), high school education (OR: 2.89), and catholic religion (OR: 2.16) were associated with an increased likelihood of a positive IgG antibodies against SARS-CoV-2. Anosmia [Incidence Proportion Ratio (IPR): 7.41] and ageusia (IPR:8.51) were the most frequent associated symptoms.

Conclusion

HCWs with low mean family income, lower level of schooling, ancillary workor being black had a significantly higher likelihood of testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. Social vulnerability was an important risk factor for COVID-19 infection.

The effect of COVID-19 pandemic on the length of stay and outcomes in the emergency department

Objective

This study aimed to evaluate the change in length of stay (LOS) in the emergency department (ED) and outcomes during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic.

Methods

This is a single-center, retrospective observational study. We compared ED LOS and outcomes in patients aged ≥19 years who presented to the ED of Soonchunhyang University Bucheon Hospital, a single tertiary university hospital, between January and December in 2018, 2019, and 2020. We included patients who were diagnosed with fever, pneumonia, and sepsis in the ED, based on the International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems 10th Revision. We also compared the LOS and outcomes of overall ED patients in 2019 (before COVID-19) and in 2020 (after COVID-19).

Results

A total of 5,061 patients with fever, pneumonia, and sepsis were analyzed. The LOS in the ED in 2020 significantly increased compared with 2018 and 2019 (177.0±115.0 minutes in 2018, 154.0±85.0 minutes in 2019, and 208.0±239.0 minutes in 2020). The proportion of patients who were transferred to other hospitals in 2020 (2.1%) increased compared with 2018 (0.8%) and 2019 (0.7%). Intensive care unit admission significantly increased in 2020 (13.7%) compared with 2019 (10.3%). Among all ED patients, ED LOS in 2020 was longer than in 2019, particularly in patients who were admitted and then transferred to another hospital. Intensive care unit admission (4.4% vs. 5.0%), transfer rate (0.7% vs. 0.9%), and ED mortality (0.6% vs. 0.7%) also significantly increased.

Conclusion

The ED LOS, time to intensive care unit admissions, time to transfer to other hospitals, and ED mortality significantly increased during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Rapid and Low-Cost Detection and Quantification of SARS-CoV-2 Antibody Titers of ICU Patients with Respiratory Deterioration Using a Handheld Thermo-Photonic Device

While research suggests that COVID-19 vaccines are effective in producing anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies that reduce the risk of COVID-19 and its potentially severe complications, how long these antibodies persist after the infection/vaccination is unknown. Longitudinal studies and rapid and scalable platforms are needed for large-scale sero-diagnosis and vaccine evaluation. In this study, we examine the efficacy of our recently-developed handheld thermo-photonic device for rapid and low-cost assessment of the adaptive immune response of COVID⁺ and COVID⁻ patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) at a local hospital due to respiratory deterioration. Antibody testing included detection and quantification of IgG and IgM via thermo-photonic sensing of a commercially available COVID-19 IgG/IgM rapid test as well as standard measurements with quantitative enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (qELISA). The results demonstrate that the thermo-photonic reader in conjunction with COVID-19 IgG/IgM test cassettes can detect and quantify IgG levels in COVID-19 antibody assays within the clinically relevant range and with a high correlation to those obtained from qELISA. We also found that the IgG antibody is more reliable for detecting individuals with an adaptive immune response to SARS-CoV-2 compared to the IgM antibody. The developed reader offers a low-cost, portable, and scalable solution for accessing the antibody titer of individuals against SARS-CoV-2 and can be used in local hospital settings.

Performance of the FREND™ COVID-19 IgG/IgM Duo point-of-care test for SARS-CoV-2 antibody detection

PURPOSE

In the context of the current COVID-19 pandemic, multiple serological assays for the detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome 2 (SARS-CoV-2) immune response are currently being developed. This study compares the FRENDTM COVID-19 IgG/IgM Duo (NanoEntec) a point of care (POCT) assay with the automated Elecsys anti-SARS-CoV-2 electrochemiluminescent assay (Roche Diagnostics).

METHODS

Serum samples (n = 81) from PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 positive patients at different time points after the onset of symptoms were analyzed with both assays. An additional 24 serum samples with cross reactivity potential were also included.

RESULTS

The sensitivity of the COVID-19 IgG/IgM Duo assay was higher as compared to the Elecsys anti-SARS-CoV-2 assay, especially when using the combined IgM/IgG result in samples analyzed within 6 days after the onset of symptoms (46.2% vs. 15.4%). The sensitivity of both assays increased with increasing time interval after the onset of symptoms and reached 100% for the COVID-19 IgG/IgM Duo assay in samples taken 14 days or more after symptom onset. Specificity of the COVID-19 IgG/IgM Duo assay was 95.8% for IgM, 91.7% for IgG and 87.5% for the combination of both.

CONCLUSION

This study shows that the sensitivity of both assays was highly dependent on the time interval between the onset of the COVID-19 symptoms and serum sampling. Furthermore, rapid serological testing for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies by means of the FRENDTM COVID-19 IgG/IgM Duo POCT assay showed a comparable diagnostic performance as the reference automated immunoassay.

SARS-CoV-2 Molecular Diagnostics in China

The COVID-19 pandemic remains a significant problem involving health systems worldwide. Several diagnostic methods are reported for detecting the coronavirus in clinical, research, and public health laboratories. rRT-PCR is considered the gold standard; however, as it required skilled personnel and special equipment, rapid antigen tests have been developed and used as first-line screening. The serologic testing of antibodies can also be used to enhance the detection sensitivity and accuracy, which are used to assess the overall infection rate. This review summarizes the molecular techniques and serologic assays widely used in China and discusses the advantages and disadvantages of these techniques.

A Multiple-Target Simultaneous Detection Method for Immunosorbent Assay and Immunospot Assay

Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) is one of the most common methods in biological studies, and enzyme-linked immunospot (ELISpot) is a method to measure specific cell numbers by detecting protein secretion at a single-cell level. However, these two current methods can only detect one signal at one time and the sensitivity is not high enough to test low-concentration samples, which are major shortcomings in systematically analyzing the samples of interest. Herein, we demonstrated fluorescence-based oligo-linked immunosorbent assay (FOLISA) and fluorescence-based oligo-linked immunospot (FOLISPOT), which utilized DNA-barcoded antibodies to provide a highly multiplexed method with signal amplification. Signal amplification and simultaneous multiple-target detection were achieved by DNA complementary pairing and modular orthogonal DNA concatemers. By comparing FOLISA with traditional ELISA and comparing FOLISPOT with traditional ELISPOT, we found that the detection sensitivities of FOLISA and FOLISPOT are much higher than those of traditional ELISA and ELISPOT. The detection limit of ELISA is around 3 pg/mL, and the detection limit of FOLISA is below 0.06 pg/mL. FOLISPOT can detect more spots than ELISPOT and can detect targets that are undetectable for ELISPOT. Furthermore, FOLISA and FOLISPOT allowed sequential detection of multiple targets by using a single dye or multiple dyes in one round and sequential detection in multiple rounds. Thus, FOLISA and FOLISPOT enabled simultaneous detection of a large number of targets, significantly improved the detection sensitivity, and overcame the shortcomings of ELISA and ELISPOT. Overall, FOLISA and FOLISPOT presented effective and general platforms for rapid and multiplexed detection of antigens or antibodies with high sensitivity, either in laboratory tests or potentially in clinic tests.

The Safety of Cold-Chain Food in Post-COVID-19 Pandemic: Precaution and Quarantine

Since the outbreak of coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19), cold-chain food contamination caused by the pathogenic severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) has attracted huge concern. Cold-chain foods provide a congenial environment for SARS-CoV-2 survival, which presents a potential risk for public health. Strengthening the SARS-CoV-2 supervision of cold-chain foods has become the top priority in many countries. Methodologically, the potential safety risks and precaution measures of SARS-CoV-2 contamination on cold-chain food are analyzed. To ensure the safety of cold-chain foods, the advances in SARS-CoV-2 detection strategies are summarized based on technical principles and target biomarkers. In particular, the techniques suitable for SARS-CoV-2 detection in a cold-chain environment are discussed. Although many quarantine techniques are available, the field-based quarantine technique on cold-chain food with characteristics of real-time, sensitive, specific, portable, and large-scale application is urgently needed.

Seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibody among urban Iranian population: findings from the second large population-based cross-sectional study

Background

The first large serosurvey in Iran found a SARS-CoV-2 antibody seroprevalence of 17.1% among the general population in the first wave of the epidemic by April, 2020. The purpose of the current study was to assess the seroprevalence of COVID-19 infection among Iranian general population after the third wave of the disease.

Methods

This population-based cross-sectional study was conducted on 7411 individuals aged ≥10 years old in 16 cities across 15 provinces in Iran between January and March, 2021. We randomly sampled individuals registered in the Iranian electronic health record system based on their national identification numbers and invited them by telephone to a healthcare center for data collection. Presence of SARS-CoV-2-specific IgG and IgM antibodies was assessed using the SARS-CoV-2 ELISA kits. The participants were also asked about their recent COVID-19-related symptoms, including cough, fever, chills, sore throat, headache, dyspnea, diarrhea, anosmia, conjunctivitis, weakness, myalgia, arthralgia, altered level of consciousness, and chest pain. The seroprevalence was estimated after adjustment for population weighting and test performance.

Results

The overall population-weighted seroprevalence adjusted for test performance was 34.2% (95% CI 31.0-37.3), with an estimated 7,667,874 (95% CI 6,950,412-8,362,915) infected individuals from the 16 cities. The seroprevalence varied between the cities, from the highest estimate in Tabriz (39.2% [95% CI 33.0-45.5]) to the lowest estimate in Kerman (16.0% [95% CI 10.7-21.4]). In the 16 cities studied, 50.9% of the seropositive individuals did not report a history of symptoms suggestive of COVID-19, implying an estimation of 3,902,948 (95% CI 3,537,760-4,256,724) asymptomatic infected individuals.

Conclusions

Nearly one in three individuals were exposed to SARS-CoV-2 in the studied cities by March 2021. The seroprevalence increased about two-fold between April, 2020, and March, 2021.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12889-022-13464-7.

Efficacy of POC Antibody Assays after COVID-19 Infection and Potential Utility for "Immunity Passports"

OBJECTIVE

Numerous manufacturers market lateral flow assays for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies, but there are many questions about the reliability and efficacy of these tests.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Serum specimens from 60 individuals were analyzed using 2 lateral flow antibody assays, an in-house enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), and the Abbott SARS-CoV-2 IgG chemiluminescent immunoassay.

RESULTS

The BioMedomics and Premier Biotech lateral flow assays were positive for IgM in 73.3% and 70% and for IgG in 80% and 73.3% of specimens, respectively. The ELISA assay was positive for IgM and IgG in 73.3% and 86.7% of specimens from infected individuals, whereas the Abbott assay was positive in 80%. The specificities of the 4 assays ranged from 96.7% to 100% for IgM and from 93.3% to 100% for IgG.

CONCLUSION

Results of the 2 lateral flow assays were comparable to those of the ELISA and Abbott assays. Assay efficacy depended on length of time after SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Equipment-free, gold nanoparticle based semiquantitative assay of SARS-CoV-2-S1RBD IgG from fingertip blood: A practical strategy for on-site measurement of COVID-19 antibodies

COVID-19 remains as a major threat to human society. A reliable, sensitive, rapid, and low requirement assay for serum neutralizing antibodies is needed as a pandemic management tool for estimation of revaccination time and implementation of "immune passport". Using gold nanoparticle (AuNR) as an immunosensor, we have established a semi-quantitative, instrument-free assay for measuring antibody level against SRAS-CoV-2 spike1 (S1) receptor binding domain (RBD) from fingertip blood samples. The testing results by the developed method correlated well with those obtained from conventional ELISA assay, indicating reliable quantitation could be achieved without use of plate reader. A declined of immunoglobulin G (IgG) antibody associated with vaccination time was observed, which agreed well with the data from other reports. The developed method provides a potentially complementary strategy for on-site measurement of COVID-19 antibodies.

An isothermal amplification-coupled dipstick for the rapid detection of COVID-19

Early detection of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is critical for both initiating appropriate treatment and preventing the spread of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the causative agent. A simple and rapid diagnostic test that can be performed without any expensive equipment would be valuable for clinicians working in a low-resource setting. Here, we report a point-of-care detection technique for COVID-19 that combines the power of isothermal amplification (reverse transcription helicase-dependent amplification, RT-HDA) and dipstick technologies. The limit of detection of this diagnostic test is six copies of SARS-CoV-2 µl^-1 in clinical specimens. Of the 22 clinical specimens tested, RT-HDA-coupled dipstick correctly identified all positive and negative specimens. The RT-HDA can be performed over a heating block and the results can be interpreted visually with the dipstick technology without any specialized equipment. Furthermore, the RT-HDA-coupled dipstick could be performed in a short turnaround time of ~2 h. Thus, the RT-HDA-coupled dipstick could serve as a point-of-care diagnostic test for COVID-19 in a low-resource environment.

Longitudinal profile of antibody response to SARS-CoV-2 in patients with COVID-19 in a setting from Sub-Saharan Africa: A prospective longitudinal study

Background

Serological testing for SARS-CoV-2 plays an important role for epidemiological studies, in aiding the diagnosis of COVID-19, and assess vaccine responses. Little is known on dynamics of SARS-CoV-2 serology in African settings. Here, we aimed to characterize the longitudinal antibody response profile to SARS-CoV-2 in Ethiopia.

Methods

In this prospective study, a total of 102 PCR-confirmed COVID-19 patients were enrolled. We obtained 802 plasma samples collected serially. SARS-CoV-2 antibodies were determined using four lateral flow immune-assays (LFIAs), and an electrochemiluminescent immunoassay. We determined longitudinal antibody response to SARS-CoV-2 as well as seroconversion dynamics.

Results

Serological positivity rate ranged between 12%-91%, depending on timing after symptom onset. There was no difference in positivity rate between severe and non-severe COVID-19 cases. The specificity ranged between 90%-97%. Agreement between different assays ranged between 84%-92%. The estimated positive predictive value (PPV) for IgM or IgG in a scenario with seroprevalence at 5% varies from 33% to 58%. Nonetheless, when the population seroprevalence increases to 25% and 50%, there is a corresponding increases in the estimated PPVs. The estimated negative-predictive value (NPV) in a low seroprevalence scenario (5%) is high (>99%). However, the estimated NPV in a high seroprevalence scenario (50%) for IgM or IgG is reduced significantly to 80% to 85%. Overall, 28/102 (27.5%) seroconverted by one or more assays tested, within a median time of 11 (IQR: 9–15) days post symptom onset. The median seroconversion time among symptomatic cases tended to be shorter when compared to asymptomatic patients [9 (IQR: 6–11) vs. 15 (IQR: 13–21) days; p = 0.002]. Overall, seroconversion reached 100% 5.5 weeks after the onset of symptoms. Notably, of the remaining 74 COVID-19 patients included in the cohort, 64 (62.8%) were positive for antibody at the time of enrollment, and 10 (9.8%) patients failed to mount a detectable antibody response by any of the assays tested during follow-up.

Conclusions

Longitudinal assessment of antibody response in African COVID-19 patients revealed heterogeneous responses. This underscores the need for a comprehensive evaluation of seroassays before implementation. Factors associated with failure to seroconvert needs further research.

Added value of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody testing in a Flemish nursing home during an acute COVID-19 outbreak in April 2020

OBJECTIVES

To examine the added value of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody testing in a nursing home during an acute COVID-19 outbreak. RT-PCR is the gold standard, but can be false-negative.

METHODS

119 residents and 93 staff members were tested with RT-PCR test and/or a rapid IgM/IgG test. Of these participants, 176 had both tests, 24 only RT-PCR, and 12 only IgM/IgG in the period April 14 to 16 April 2020.

RESULTS

40 (34%) residents and 11 (13%) staff were PCR-positive. Using a rapid IgM/IgG test, 17 (17%) residents and 18 (20%) staff were positive for IgM and/or IgG (IgM/IgG). Thirty-two PCR-positive residents had an IgM/IgG test: 9 (28%), 11 (34%), and 13 (41%) were positive for IgM, IgG, and IgM/IgG. Ten PCR-positive staff had an IgM/IgG test: 3 (30%), 6 (60%), and 6 (60%) were positive for IgM, IgG, and IgM/IgG. Additional IgM/IgG tests were performed in 9 residents 11 to 14 days after the positive RT-PCR test. Of those, 7 (78%) tested positive for IgM/IgG. When retested 3 weeks later, the 2 remaining residents also tested positive. Of the 134 PCR-negative participants who had an IgM/IgG test, 15 were positive for IgM/IgG (8% of the 200 participants tested with RT-PCR).

CONCLUSIONS

During an acute outbreak in a nursing home, 26% of residents and staff were PCR-positive. An additional 8% was diagnosed using IgM/IgG antibody testing. The use of RT-PCR alone as the sole diagnostic method for surveillance during an acute outbreak is insufficient to grab the full extent of the outbreak.

COVID-19 infections in staff of an emergency care hospital after the first wave of the pandemic in Germany

Background: Hospital staff have an increased risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection. It is thus necessary to monitor the situation because infected staff may in turn infect patients and their family members. Following the first wave of infection in the summer of 2020, the Rhine-Maas Hospital (RMK) provided all staff the opportunity to be tested for SARS-COV-2 via antibody testing.

Methods: The tests were carried out from 19.6.2020 to 17.7.2020. The IgG antibody test qualitatively tested for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies via enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). An IgG titre of 0.8 IU/mL or more was considered positive. All staff who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 by PCR testing after February 2020 were also included in the study. Occupational and non-occupational risk factors for infection were determined. Staff in the intensive care ward, the emergency depart-ment, or a SARS-CoV-2 ward (“corona ward”) were predefined as having increased exposure. Odds ratios (OR) were calculated using logistical regression for occupational and private infection risk.

Results: 903 staff members (58.9%) with complete data took part in the cross-sectional study. 52 staff members (5.8%) had a positive PCR test result in their medical history or tested positive in the IgG test. Around half of the infections (55%) were only detected by serological testing during the study. Staff with tasks classified as at-risk had an OR of 1.9 (95% CI 1.04–3.5) for infection. Risk factors also included private contacts to people infected with SARS-CoV-2 and holidays in risk areas. At the time of data collection, 11.5% of those with the disease reported that they had not yet fully recovered from COVID-19.

Discussion: Following the first COVID-19 wave, 5.3% of staff at the RMK were infected. An increase in occupational infection risk was found even after controlling for non-occupational infection risks. This should be taken into account with regard to the recognition of COVID-19 as an occupational disease. Methods to improve protection against nosocomial transmissions should be considered.

Rapid and Quantitative In Vitro Evaluation of SARS-CoV-2 Neutralizing Antibodies and Nanobodies

Neutralizing monoclonal antibodies and nanobodies have shown promising results as potential therapeutic agents for COVID-19. Identifying such antibodies and nanobodies requires evaluating the neutralization activity of a large number of lead molecules via biological assays, such as the virus neutralization test (VNT). These assays are typically time-consuming and demanding on-lab facilities. Here, we present a rapid and quantitative assay that evaluates the neutralizing efficacy of an antibody or nanobody within 1.5 h, does not require BSL-2 facilities, and consumes only 8 μL of a low concentration (ng/mL) sample for each assay run. We tested the human angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) binding inhibition efficacy of seven antibodies and eight nanobodies and verified that the IC₅₀ values of our assay are comparable with those from SARS-CoV-2 pseudovirus neutralization tests. We also found that our assay could evaluate the neutralizing efficacy against three widespread SARS-CoV-2 variants. We observed increased affinity of these variants for ACE2, including the β and γ variants. Finally, we demonstrated that our assay enables the rapid identification of an immune-evasive mutation of the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein, utilizing a set of nanobodies with known binding epitopes.

Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay: An Adaptable Methodology to Study SARS-CoV-2 Humoral and Cellular Immune Responses

The Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay is a versatile technique, which can be used for several applications. It has enormously contributed to the study of infectious diseases. This review highlights how this methodology supported the science conducted in COVID-19 pandemics, allowing scientists to better understand the immune response against SARS-CoV-2. ELISA can be modified to assess the functionality of antibodies, as avidity and neutralization, respectively by the standardization of avidity-ELISA and surrogate-neutralization methods. Cellular immunity can also be studied using this assay. Products secreted by cells, like proteins and cytokines, can be studied by ELISA or its derivative Enzyme-linked immunospot (ELISpot) assay. ELISA and ELISA-based methods aided the area of immunology against infectious diseases and is still relevant, for example, as a promising approach to study the differences between natural and vaccine-induced immune responses against SARS-CoV-2.

Performance Evaluation of Lateral Flow Assays for Coronavirus Disease-19 Serology

The coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, caused by infection with the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2), has undoubtedly resulted in significant morbidities, mortalities, and economic disruptions across the globe. Affordable and scalable tools to monitor the transmission dynamics of the SARS-CoV-2 virus and the longevity of induced antibodies will be paramount to monitor and control the pandemic as multiple waves continue to rage in many countries. Serologic assays detect humoral responses to the virus, to determine seroprevalence in target populations, or induction of antibodies at the individual level following either natural infection or vaccination. With multiple vaccines rolling out globally, serologic assays to detect anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies will be important tools to monitor the development of herd immunity. To address this need, serologic lateral flow assays (LFAs), which can be easily implemented for both population surveillance and home use, will be vital to monitor the evolution of the pandemic and inform containment measures. Such assays are particularly important for monitoring the transmission dynamics and durability of immunity generated by natural infections and vaccination, particularly in resource-limited settings. In this review, we discuss considerations for evaluating the accuracy of these LFAs, their suitability for different use cases, and implementation opportunities.

Cumulative Incidence of SARS-CoV-2 in Healthcare Workers at a General Hospital in Germany during the Pandemic-A Longitudinal Analysis

Health workers (HW) are at increased risk for SARS-CoV-2 infection. In order to monitor the infection dynamic on the basis of contact with patients, HW at the St. Antonius Hospital (SAH) were tested four times in one year by PCR and serology. The cumulative incidence of infection in HW was calculated. Swab and blood tests were simultaneously performed between April 2020 and April 2021. Risk factors and demographic information were assessed at the beginning of the study. The response rate was above 75% in all rounds of testing. The study comprised 1506 HW, 165 (10.6%) of which tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 infection. Working in an ICU or on wards with patient contact were risk factors (OR 4.4, 95% CI 1.73–13.6 and OR 2.9, 95% CI 1.27–8.49). At the end of the study, the majority of HW (810 of 1363 (59.4%)) had been vaccinated at least once. A total of 29.1% of unvaccinated HW and 5.3% of vaccinated HW showed an immune response typical for natural SARS-CoV-2 infection. Of the 73 HW who provided information on the course of the disease, 31.5% reported that their quality of life continued to be impaired. The cumulative incidence of infection was low in these HW, which may be attributed to vaccination and good hygiene. Nevertheless, a work-related infection risk was identified, highlighting the need to improve protection against infection. A high risk of developing long COVID was found after the infection has subsided. Special rehabilitation programs should be provided and HW should be compensated for reduced work capacity in the case that rehabilitation fails or takes a long time.

Comparative study of six SARS-CoV-2 serology assays: Diagnostic performance and antibody dynamics in a cohort of hospitalized patients for moderate to critical COVID-19

BACKGROUND

To overcome the COVID-19 pandemic, serology assays are needed to identify past and ongoing infections. In this context, we evaluated the diagnostic performance of 6 immunoassays on samples from hospitalized patients for moderate to critical COVID-19.

METHODS

701 serum samples obtained from 443 COVID-19 patients (G1: 356 positive RT-PCR patients and G2: 87 negative RT-PCR cases) and 108 pre-pandemic sera from blood donors were tested with 6 commercial immunoassays: (1) Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2, Roche (Nucleocapsid, N), (2) Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 S, Roche (Spike, S), (3) Vidas SARS-COV-2 IgM/IgG, BioMérieux (S), (4) SARS-CoV-2 IgG, Abbott (N), (5) Access SARS-CoV-2 IgG, Beckman Coulter (Receptor Binding Domain), and (6) Standard F COVID-19 IgM/IgG Combo FIA, SD Biosensor (N).

RESULTS

Global sensitivities of the evaluated assays were as follows: (1) Roche anti-N = 74.5% [69.6-79.3], (2) Roche anti-S = 92.7% [84.7-100], (3) Vidas IgM = 74.9% [68.6-81.2], (4) Vidas IgG = 73.9% [67.6-80.1], (5) Abbott = 78.6% [63.4-93.8], (6) Beckman Coulter = 74.5% [62-86.9], (7) SD Biosensor IgM = 73.1% [61-85.1], and (8) SD Biosensor IgG = 76.9% [65.4-88.4]. Sensitivities increased gradually from week 1 to week 3 as follow: (1) Roche anti-N: 63.3%, 81% and 82.1%; (2) Vidas IgM: 68.2%, 83.2% and 85.9%; and (3) Vidas IgG: 66.7%, 79.1% and 86.6%. All immunoassays showed a specificity of 100%. Seropositivity was significantly associated with a higher frequency of critical COVID-19 (50.8% vs. 38.2%), p = 0.018, OR [95% CI] = 1.668 [1.09-2.553]. Inversely, death occurred more frequently in seronegative patients (28.7% vs. 13.6%), p=3.02 E-4, OR [95% CI] = 0.392 [0.233-0.658].

CONCLUSION

Evaluated serology assays exhibited good sensitivities and excellent specificities. Sensitivities increased gradually after symptoms onset. Even if seropositivity is more frequent in patients with critical COVID-19, it may predict a recovery outcome.

Lower persistence of anti-nucleocapsid compared to anti-spike antibodies up to one year after SARS-CoV-2 infection

We retrospectively compared the long-term evolution of IgG anti-spike (S) and anti-nucleocapsid (N) levels (Abbott immunoassays) in 116 non-severe and 115 severe SARS-CoV-2 infected patients from 2 university hospitals up to 365 days post positive RT-PCR. IgG anti-S and anti-N antibody levels decayed exponentially up to 365 days after a peak 0 to 59 days after positive RT-PCR. Peak antibody level/cut-off ratio 0 to 59 days after positive RT-PCR was more than 70 for anti-S compared to less than 6 for anti-N (P < 0.01). Anti-S and anti-N were significantly higher in severe compared to non-severe patients up to 180 to 239 days and 300 to 365 days, respectively (P < 0.05). Despite similar half-lives, the estimated time to 50% seronegativity was more than 2 years for anti-S compared to less than 1 year for anti-N in non-severe and severe COVID-19 patients, due to the significantly higher peak antibody level/cut-off ratio for anti-S compared to anti-N.

Review of Clinical Performance of Serology Based Commercial Diagnostic Assays for Detection of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Antibodies

The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) virus, which caused the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic as declared by the World Health Organization, has created havoc worldwide. The highly transmissible infection can be contained only by accurate diagnosis, quarantining, and exercising social distancing. Therefore, quick and massive deployment of SARS-CoV-2 testing plays a crucial role in the identification and isolation of infected patients. Reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction is the gold standard for COVID-19 detection; however, it needs expertise, facilities, and time. Hence, for the ease of population-wide screening, serology-based diagnostic assays were introduced. These can help determine the prevalence of infection, understand the epidemiology of the disease, and assist in suitable public health interventions while being user-friendly and less time consuming. Although serological testing kits in markets soared, their sensitivity and specificity were questioned in reports from different parts of the world. In this article, we have reviewed 40 Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and CE-approved clinically evaluated serological kits (8 enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay [ELISA] kits, 10 chemiluminescent immunoassay [CLIA] kits, and 22 lateral flow immunoassay [LFIA] kits) for their sensitivity and specificity and discussed the apparent reasons behind their performance. We observed appreciable sensitivity in the kits detecting total antibodies compared to the kits targeting single isotype antibodies. Tests that determined antibodies against nucleocapsid protein were found to be more sensitive and those detecting antibodies against spike protein were found to have greater specificity. This study was conducted to help the decision-making while acquiring antibody kits and concurrently to be mindful of their shortcomings.

Immunity to SARS-CoV-2 induced by infection or vaccination

Adaptive immune responses play critical roles in viral clearance and protection against re-infection, and SARS-CoV-2 is no exception. What is exceptional is the rapid characterization of the immune response to the virus performed by researchers during the first 20 months of the pandemic. This has given us a more detailed understanding of SARS-CoV-2 compared to many viruses that have been with us for a long time. Furthermore, effective COVID-19 vaccines were developed in record time, and their rollout worldwide is already making a significant difference, although major challenges remain in terms of equal access. The pandemic has engaged scientists and the public alike, and terms such as seroprevalence, neutralizing antibodies, antibody escape and vaccine certificates have become familiar to a broad community. Here, we review key findings concerning B cell and antibody (Ab) responses to SARS-CoV-2, focusing on non-severe cases and anti-spike (S) Ab responses in particular, the latter being central to protective immunity induced by infection or vaccination. The emergence of viral variants that have acquired mutations in S acutely highlights the need for continued characterization of both emerging variants and Ab responses against these during the evolving pathogen-immune system arms race.