血清2019-nCoV IgM和IgG抗体诊断COVID-19的初步研究

Q4 Health Professions
L. Ping, Zhiyong Li, Si-ting Zhao, Qiong Li, Yan Hu, Yufeng Chen, Fan Yi, Q. Xie, Zhaoqiong Zeng, Changjuan Deng, Zhanxiang Wang, Xiaobing Xie
{"title":"血清2019-nCoV IgM和IgG抗体诊断COVID-19的初步研究","authors":"L. Ping, Zhiyong Li, Si-ting Zhao, Qiong Li, Yan Hu, Yufeng Chen, Fan Yi, Q. Xie, Zhaoqiong Zeng, Changjuan Deng, Zhanxiang Wang, Xiaobing Xie","doi":"10.3760/CMA.J.CN114452-20200302-00155","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective \nTo analyze the clinical value of serum 2019 New Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) immunoglobulin M (IgM) and immunoglobulin G (IgG) antibodies in the diagnosis of novel coronavirus pneumonia (NCP). \n \n \nMethods \nA total of 116 patients diagnosed with NCP in the First Affiliated Hospital of Hunan University of Chinese Medicine and the First Affiliated Hospital of Xiamen University were enrolled from January to February 2020 as the disease group. A total of 134 cases, including 84 non-NCP inpatients and 50 healthy individuals served as the control group. Serum samples from all subjects were collected. A fully-automated chemiluminescence immunoassay analyzer was used to detect the concentration of 2019-nCoV IgM and IgG antibodies in serum. The sensitivity and specificity of the 2019-nCoV IgM and IgG antibody single test and combined detection were compared using the χ2 test. χ2 test and Wilcoxon’s rank sum test were used to compare the positive rates and concentrations of IgM and IgG antibodies in NCP patients before and after their 2019-nCoV nucleic acid tests turning negative, respectively. The change trend of 2019-nCoV antibody concentration in the process of NCP patients was analyzed by Wilcoxon’s rank sum test. \n \n \nResults \nThe sensitivity of 2019-nCoV IgG (90.5%, 105/116) was higher than that of 2019-nCoV IgM (75.9%, 88/116), the difference was statistically significant (χ2=8.91, P<0.05); The specificity of 2019-nCoV IgG (99.3%, 133/134) was higher than that of 2019-nCoV IgM (94.0%, 126/134), the difference was statistically significant (χ2=5.63, P<0.05). The sensitivity (89.7%, 87/97) of 2019-nCoV IgM combined with IgG was higher than that of 2019-nCoV IgM, the difference was statistically significant ( χ2=6.89, P<0.05). The specificity (100%, 125/125) of 2019-nCoV IgM combined with IgG was higher than that of 2019-nCoV IgM, the difference was statistically significant ( χ2=7.70, P<0.05). After 2019-nCoV nucleic acid test converted to negative, the positive rate (52.9%, 9/17) and concentration [13.0 (4.9, 24.7) AU/ml] of serum 2019-nCoV IgM antibody were significantly lower than those when the nucleic acid test was positive, positive rate (88.2%, 15/17) and concentration [29.5 (14.0, 61.3) AU/ml] , respectively (χ2=5.10, Z=-3.195, both P<0.05). In the course of NCP, patients' serum samples were collected from the first day of diagnosis to every three days, three times in total. The first 2019-nCoV IgM and IgG antibody concentrations [19.4 (12.4, 63.7) AU/ml, 105.8 (74.8, 126.1) AU/ml, respectively] were significantly higher than the second concentrations [15.8 (7.1, 40.3)AU/ml, 80.5 (66.7, 105.9) AU/ml], Z were -2.897, -3.179, both P<0.05. \n \n \nConclusions \n2019-nCoV IgG antibody has a good application value in the diagnosis of NCP; The concentration of 2019-nCoV IgM antibody has a certain correlation with the detection of 2019-nCoV nucleic acid; The combination of 2019-nCoV IgM and IgG antibodies with 2019-nCoV nucleic acid test may be the best laboratory index for the diagnosis of NCP at present. \n \n \nKey words: \nCoronavirus; Pneumonia, viral; Immunoglobulin M; Immunoglobulin G; Nucleic acids; Sensitivity and specificity; Real-time polymerase chain reaction","PeriodicalId":10096,"journal":{"name":"中华检验医学杂志","volume":"20 1","pages":"352-357"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-03-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Preliminary study of serum 2019-nCoV IgM and IgG antibodies in the diagnosis of COVID-19\",\"authors\":\"L. Ping, Zhiyong Li, Si-ting Zhao, Qiong Li, Yan Hu, Yufeng Chen, Fan Yi, Q. Xie, Zhaoqiong Zeng, Changjuan Deng, Zhanxiang Wang, Xiaobing Xie\",\"doi\":\"10.3760/CMA.J.CN114452-20200302-00155\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Objective \\nTo analyze the clinical value of serum 2019 New Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) immunoglobulin M (IgM) and immunoglobulin G (IgG) antibodies in the diagnosis of novel coronavirus pneumonia (NCP). \\n \\n \\nMethods \\nA total of 116 patients diagnosed with NCP in the First Affiliated Hospital of Hunan University of Chinese Medicine and the First Affiliated Hospital of Xiamen University were enrolled from January to February 2020 as the disease group. A total of 134 cases, including 84 non-NCP inpatients and 50 healthy individuals served as the control group. Serum samples from all subjects were collected. A fully-automated chemiluminescence immunoassay analyzer was used to detect the concentration of 2019-nCoV IgM and IgG antibodies in serum. The sensitivity and specificity of the 2019-nCoV IgM and IgG antibody single test and combined detection were compared using the χ2 test. χ2 test and Wilcoxon’s rank sum test were used to compare the positive rates and concentrations of IgM and IgG antibodies in NCP patients before and after their 2019-nCoV nucleic acid tests turning negative, respectively. The change trend of 2019-nCoV antibody concentration in the process of NCP patients was analyzed by Wilcoxon’s rank sum test. \\n \\n \\nResults \\nThe sensitivity of 2019-nCoV IgG (90.5%, 105/116) was higher than that of 2019-nCoV IgM (75.9%, 88/116), the difference was statistically significant (χ2=8.91, P<0.05); The specificity of 2019-nCoV IgG (99.3%, 133/134) was higher than that of 2019-nCoV IgM (94.0%, 126/134), the difference was statistically significant (χ2=5.63, P<0.05). The sensitivity (89.7%, 87/97) of 2019-nCoV IgM combined with IgG was higher than that of 2019-nCoV IgM, the difference was statistically significant ( χ2=6.89, P<0.05). The specificity (100%, 125/125) of 2019-nCoV IgM combined with IgG was higher than that of 2019-nCoV IgM, the difference was statistically significant ( χ2=7.70, P<0.05). After 2019-nCoV nucleic acid test converted to negative, the positive rate (52.9%, 9/17) and concentration [13.0 (4.9, 24.7) AU/ml] of serum 2019-nCoV IgM antibody were significantly lower than those when the nucleic acid test was positive, positive rate (88.2%, 15/17) and concentration [29.5 (14.0, 61.3) AU/ml] , respectively (χ2=5.10, Z=-3.195, both P<0.05). In the course of NCP, patients' serum samples were collected from the first day of diagnosis to every three days, three times in total. The first 2019-nCoV IgM and IgG antibody concentrations [19.4 (12.4, 63.7) AU/ml, 105.8 (74.8, 126.1) AU/ml, respectively] were significantly higher than the second concentrations [15.8 (7.1, 40.3)AU/ml, 80.5 (66.7, 105.9) AU/ml], Z were -2.897, -3.179, both P<0.05. \\n \\n \\nConclusions \\n2019-nCoV IgG antibody has a good application value in the diagnosis of NCP; The concentration of 2019-nCoV IgM antibody has a certain correlation with the detection of 2019-nCoV nucleic acid; The combination of 2019-nCoV IgM and IgG antibodies with 2019-nCoV nucleic acid test may be the best laboratory index for the diagnosis of NCP at present. \\n \\n \\nKey words: \\nCoronavirus; Pneumonia, viral; Immunoglobulin M; Immunoglobulin G; Nucleic acids; Sensitivity and specificity; Real-time polymerase chain reaction\",\"PeriodicalId\":10096,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"中华检验医学杂志\",\"volume\":\"20 1\",\"pages\":\"352-357\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-03-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"中华检验医学杂志\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3760/CMA.J.CN114452-20200302-00155\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"Health Professions\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"中华检验医学杂志","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3760/CMA.J.CN114452-20200302-00155","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Health Professions","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

目的分析血清2019新型冠状病毒(2019- ncov)免疫球蛋白M (IgM)和免疫球蛋白G (IgG)抗体在新型冠状病毒肺炎(NCP)诊断中的临床价值。方法选取2020年1 - 2月在湖南中医药大学第一附属医院和厦门大学第一附属医院确诊的新型冠状病毒感染患者116例作为疾病组。共134例,其中84例为非新型冠状病毒肺炎住院患者,50例为对照组。收集所有受试者的血清样本。采用全自动化学发光免疫分析法检测血清中2019-nCoV IgM和IgG抗体浓度。采用χ2检验比较新型冠状病毒IgM、IgG抗体单项检测与联合检测的敏感性和特异性。采用χ2检验和Wilcoxon秩和检验,比较新冠肺炎患者核酸检测转为阴性前后IgM抗体和IgG抗体的阳性率和浓度。采用Wilcoxon秩和检验分析新型冠状病毒抗体浓度在新型冠状病毒感染过程中的变化趋势。结果2019-nCoV IgG(90.5%, 105/116)的敏感性高于2019-nCoV IgM(75.9%, 88/116),差异有统计学意义(χ2=8.91, P<0.05);2019-nCoV IgG特异性(99.3%,133/134)高于2019-nCoV IgM特异性(94.0%,126/134),差异有统计学意义(χ2=5.63, P<0.05)。2019-nCoV IgM联合IgG的敏感性(89.7%,87/97)高于2019-nCoV IgM,差异有统计学意义(χ2=6.89, P<0.05)。2019-nCoV IgM联合IgG的特异性(100%,125/125)高于2019-nCoV IgM,差异有统计学意义(χ2=7.70, P<0.05)。2019-nCoV核酸检测转为阴性后,血清IgM抗体阳性率(52.9%,9/17)和浓度[13.0 (4.9,24.7)AU/ml]均显著低于核酸检测阳性时的阳性率(88.2%,15/17)和浓度[29.5 (14.0,61.3)AU/ml] (χ2=5.10, Z=-3.195, P均<0.05)。在新型冠状病毒感染过程中,从确诊第一天起至每3天采集一次患者血清样本,共采集3次。第一次IgM和IgG抗体浓度[分别为19.4 (12.4,63.7)AU/ml, 105.8 (74.8, 126.1) AU/ml]显著高于第二次浓度[15.8 (7.1,40.3)AU/ml, 80.5 (66.7, 105.9) AU/ml], Z分别为-2.897,-3.179,P均<0.05。结论新型冠状病毒IgG抗体在新型冠状病毒诊断中具有良好的应用价值;2019-nCoV IgM抗体浓度与2019-nCoV核酸检测有一定的相关性;2019-nCoV IgM和IgG抗体结合核酸检测可能是目前诊断新型冠状病毒感染的最佳实验室指标。关键词:冠状病毒;病毒性肺炎;免疫球蛋白M;免疫球蛋白G;核酸;敏感性和特异性;实时聚合酶链反应
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Preliminary study of serum 2019-nCoV IgM and IgG antibodies in the diagnosis of COVID-19
Objective To analyze the clinical value of serum 2019 New Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) immunoglobulin M (IgM) and immunoglobulin G (IgG) antibodies in the diagnosis of novel coronavirus pneumonia (NCP). Methods A total of 116 patients diagnosed with NCP in the First Affiliated Hospital of Hunan University of Chinese Medicine and the First Affiliated Hospital of Xiamen University were enrolled from January to February 2020 as the disease group. A total of 134 cases, including 84 non-NCP inpatients and 50 healthy individuals served as the control group. Serum samples from all subjects were collected. A fully-automated chemiluminescence immunoassay analyzer was used to detect the concentration of 2019-nCoV IgM and IgG antibodies in serum. The sensitivity and specificity of the 2019-nCoV IgM and IgG antibody single test and combined detection were compared using the χ2 test. χ2 test and Wilcoxon’s rank sum test were used to compare the positive rates and concentrations of IgM and IgG antibodies in NCP patients before and after their 2019-nCoV nucleic acid tests turning negative, respectively. The change trend of 2019-nCoV antibody concentration in the process of NCP patients was analyzed by Wilcoxon’s rank sum test. Results The sensitivity of 2019-nCoV IgG (90.5%, 105/116) was higher than that of 2019-nCoV IgM (75.9%, 88/116), the difference was statistically significant (χ2=8.91, P<0.05); The specificity of 2019-nCoV IgG (99.3%, 133/134) was higher than that of 2019-nCoV IgM (94.0%, 126/134), the difference was statistically significant (χ2=5.63, P<0.05). The sensitivity (89.7%, 87/97) of 2019-nCoV IgM combined with IgG was higher than that of 2019-nCoV IgM, the difference was statistically significant ( χ2=6.89, P<0.05). The specificity (100%, 125/125) of 2019-nCoV IgM combined with IgG was higher than that of 2019-nCoV IgM, the difference was statistically significant ( χ2=7.70, P<0.05). After 2019-nCoV nucleic acid test converted to negative, the positive rate (52.9%, 9/17) and concentration [13.0 (4.9, 24.7) AU/ml] of serum 2019-nCoV IgM antibody were significantly lower than those when the nucleic acid test was positive, positive rate (88.2%, 15/17) and concentration [29.5 (14.0, 61.3) AU/ml] , respectively (χ2=5.10, Z=-3.195, both P<0.05). In the course of NCP, patients' serum samples were collected from the first day of diagnosis to every three days, three times in total. The first 2019-nCoV IgM and IgG antibody concentrations [19.4 (12.4, 63.7) AU/ml, 105.8 (74.8, 126.1) AU/ml, respectively] were significantly higher than the second concentrations [15.8 (7.1, 40.3)AU/ml, 80.5 (66.7, 105.9) AU/ml], Z were -2.897, -3.179, both P<0.05. Conclusions 2019-nCoV IgG antibody has a good application value in the diagnosis of NCP; The concentration of 2019-nCoV IgM antibody has a certain correlation with the detection of 2019-nCoV nucleic acid; The combination of 2019-nCoV IgM and IgG antibodies with 2019-nCoV nucleic acid test may be the best laboratory index for the diagnosis of NCP at present. Key words: Coronavirus; Pneumonia, viral; Immunoglobulin M; Immunoglobulin G; Nucleic acids; Sensitivity and specificity; Real-time polymerase chain reaction
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
中华检验医学杂志
中华检验医学杂志 Health Professions-Medical Laboratory Technology
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
8037
期刊介绍:
×
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