新型冠状病毒IgM和IgG快速检测方法的评价评估过去与SARS-CoV-2接触的有效工具。

Q1 Environmental Science
Infection Ecology and Epidemiology Pub Date : 2020-04-14 eCollection Date: 2020-01-01 DOI:10.1080/20008686.2020.1754538
Tove Hoffman, Karolina Nissen, Janina Krambrich, Bengt Rönnberg, Dario Akaberi, Mouna Esmaeilzadeh, Erik Salaneck, Johanna Lindahl, Åke Lundkvist
{"title":"新型冠状病毒IgM和IgG快速检测方法的评价评估过去与SARS-CoV-2接触的有效工具。","authors":"Tove Hoffman, Karolina Nissen, Janina Krambrich, Bengt Rönnberg, Dario Akaberi, Mouna Esmaeilzadeh, Erik Salaneck, Johanna Lindahl, Åke Lundkvist","doi":"10.1080/20008686.2020.1754538","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT COVID-19 is the most rapidly growing pandemic in modern time, and the need for serological testing is most urgent. Although the diagnostics of acute patients by RT-PCR is both efficient and specific, we are also crucially in need of serological tools for investigating antibody responses and assessing individual and potential herd immunity. We evaluated a commercially available test developed for rapid (within 15 minutes) detection of SARS-CoV-2-specific IgM and IgG by 29 PCR-confirmed COVID-19 cases and 124 negative controls. The results revealed a sensitivity of 69% and 93.1% for IgM and IgG, respectively, based solely on PCR-positivity due to the absence of a serological gold standard. The assay specificities were shown to be 100% for IgM and 99.2% for IgG. This indicates that the test is suitable for assessing previous virus exposure, although negative results may be unreliable during the first weeks after infection. More detailed studies on antibody responses during and post infection are urgently needed.","PeriodicalId":37446,"journal":{"name":"Infection Ecology and Epidemiology","volume":"10 1","pages":"1754538"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-04-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/20008686.2020.1754538","citationCount":"177","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluation of a COVID-19 IgM and IgG rapid test; an efficient tool for assessment of past exposure to SARS-CoV-2.\",\"authors\":\"Tove Hoffman, Karolina Nissen, Janina Krambrich, Bengt Rönnberg, Dario Akaberi, Mouna Esmaeilzadeh, Erik Salaneck, Johanna Lindahl, Åke Lundkvist\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/20008686.2020.1754538\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT COVID-19 is the most rapidly growing pandemic in modern time, and the need for serological testing is most urgent. Although the diagnostics of acute patients by RT-PCR is both efficient and specific, we are also crucially in need of serological tools for investigating antibody responses and assessing individual and potential herd immunity. We evaluated a commercially available test developed for rapid (within 15 minutes) detection of SARS-CoV-2-specific IgM and IgG by 29 PCR-confirmed COVID-19 cases and 124 negative controls. The results revealed a sensitivity of 69% and 93.1% for IgM and IgG, respectively, based solely on PCR-positivity due to the absence of a serological gold standard. The assay specificities were shown to be 100% for IgM and 99.2% for IgG. This indicates that the test is suitable for assessing previous virus exposure, although negative results may be unreliable during the first weeks after infection. More detailed studies on antibody responses during and post infection are urgently needed.\",\"PeriodicalId\":37446,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Infection Ecology and Epidemiology\",\"volume\":\"10 1\",\"pages\":\"1754538\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-04-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/20008686.2020.1754538\",\"citationCount\":\"177\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Infection Ecology and Epidemiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/20008686.2020.1754538\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2020/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Environmental Science\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Infection Ecology and Epidemiology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/20008686.2020.1754538","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2020/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Environmental Science","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 177

摘要

COVID-19是现代发展最迅速的大流行,对血清学检测的需求最为迫切。虽然RT-PCR对急性患者的诊断既有效又特异性,但我们也迫切需要血清学工具来调查抗体反应并评估个体和潜在的群体免疫。我们评估了一种市售检测方法,该方法可在29例pcr确诊的COVID-19病例和124例阴性对照中快速(15分钟内)检测sars - cov -2特异性IgM和IgG。结果显示,由于缺乏血清学金标准,仅基于pcr阳性,IgM和IgG的敏感性分别为69%和93.1%。检测IgM的特异性为100%,IgG的特异性为99.2%。这表明该测试适用于评估以前的病毒暴露,尽管在感染后的最初几周内阴性结果可能不可靠。迫切需要对感染期间和感染后的抗体反应进行更详细的研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Evaluation of a COVID-19 IgM and IgG rapid test; an efficient tool for assessment of past exposure to SARS-CoV-2.

Evaluation of a COVID-19 IgM and IgG rapid test; an efficient tool for assessment of past exposure to SARS-CoV-2.

Evaluation of a COVID-19 IgM and IgG rapid test; an efficient tool for assessment of past exposure to SARS-CoV-2.
ABSTRACT COVID-19 is the most rapidly growing pandemic in modern time, and the need for serological testing is most urgent. Although the diagnostics of acute patients by RT-PCR is both efficient and specific, we are also crucially in need of serological tools for investigating antibody responses and assessing individual and potential herd immunity. We evaluated a commercially available test developed for rapid (within 15 minutes) detection of SARS-CoV-2-specific IgM and IgG by 29 PCR-confirmed COVID-19 cases and 124 negative controls. The results revealed a sensitivity of 69% and 93.1% for IgM and IgG, respectively, based solely on PCR-positivity due to the absence of a serological gold standard. The assay specificities were shown to be 100% for IgM and 99.2% for IgG. This indicates that the test is suitable for assessing previous virus exposure, although negative results may be unreliable during the first weeks after infection. More detailed studies on antibody responses during and post infection are urgently needed.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Infection Ecology and Epidemiology
Infection Ecology and Epidemiology Environmental Science-Environmental Science (miscellaneous)
CiteScore
8.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
4
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊介绍: Infection Ecology & Epidemiology aims to stimulate inter-disciplinary collaborations dealing with a range of subjects, from the plethora of zoonotic infections in humans, over diseases with implication in wildlife ecology, to advanced virology and bacteriology. The journal specifically welcomes papers from studies where researchers from multiple medical and ecological disciplines are collaborating so as to increase our knowledge of the emergence, spread and effect of new and re-emerged infectious diseases in humans, domestic animals and wildlife. Main areas of interest include, but are not limited to: 1.Zoonotic microbioorganisms 2.Vector borne infections 3.Gastrointestinal pathogens 4.Antimicrobial resistance 5.Zoonotic microbioorganisms in changing environment
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信