Department of Laboratory Medicine, Affiliated Hospital of North Sichuan Medical College, Nanchong, Sichuan, People's Republic of China.
Faculty of Laboratory Medicine, North Sichuan Medical College, Nanchong, Sichuan, People's Republic of China.
J Clin Microbiol. 2020 May 26;58(6). doi: 10.1128/JCM.00375-20.
We set out to investigate the interference factors that led to false-positive novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) IgM detection results using gold immunochromatography assay (GICA) and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) and the corresponding solutions. GICA and ELISA were used to detect SARS-CoV-2 IgM in 86 serum samples, including 5 influenza A virus (Flu A) IgM-positive sera, 5 influenza B virus (Flu B) IgM-positive sera, 5 IgM-positive sera, 5 IgM-positive sera, 6 sera of HIV infection patients, 36 rheumatoid factor IgM (RF-IgM)-positive sera, 5 sera from hypertensive patients, 5 sera from diabetes mellitus patients, and 14 sera from novel coronavirus infection disease 19 (COVID-19) patients. The interference factors causing false-positive reactivity with the two methods were analyzed, and the urea dissociation test was employed to dissociate the SARS-CoV-2 IgM-positive serum using the best dissociation concentration. The two methods detected positive SARS-CoV-2 IgM in 22 mid-to-high-level-RF-IgM-positive sera and 14 sera from COVID-19 patients; the other 50 sera were negative. At a urea dissociation concentration of 6 mol/liter, SARS-CoV-2 IgM results were positive in 1 mid-to-high-level-RF-IgM-positive serum and in 14 COVID-19 patient sera detected using GICA. At a urea dissociation concentration of 4 mol/liter and with affinity index (AI) levels lower than 0.371 set to negative, SARS-CoV-2 IgM results were positive in 3 mid-to-high-level-RF-IgM-positive sera and in 14 COVID-19 patient sera detected using ELISA. The presence of RF-IgM at mid-to-high levels could lead to false-positive reactivity of SARS-CoV-2 IgM detected using GICA and ELISA, and urea dissociation tests would be helpful in reducing SARS-CoV-2 IgM false-positive results.
我们旨在研究导致胶体金免疫层析法(GICA)和酶联免疫吸附法(ELISA)检测新型严重急性呼吸综合征冠状病毒 2(SARS-CoV-2)IgM 假阳性的干扰因素,并提出相应的解决方案。我们采用 GICA 和 ELISA 检测了 86 份血清样本中的 SARS-CoV-2 IgM,包括 5 份甲型流感病毒(Flu A)IgM 阳性血清、5 份乙型流感病毒(Flu B)IgM 阳性血清、5 份柯萨奇病毒 IgM 阳性血清、5 份埃可病毒 IgM 阳性血清、6 份人类免疫缺陷病毒(HIV)感染患者血清、36 份类风湿因子 IgM(RF-IgM)阳性血清、5 份高血压患者血清、5 份糖尿病患者血清和 14 份新型冠状病毒感染的 2019 年疾病(COVID-19)患者血清。分析了两种方法产生假阳性反应的干扰因素,并采用最佳解离浓度的尿素解离试验对 SARS-CoV-2 IgM 阳性血清进行解离。两种方法均在 22 份中高 RF-IgM 阳性血清和 14 份 COVID-19 患者血清中检测到 SARS-CoV-2 IgM 阳性;其余 50 份血清为阴性。在 6 mol/L 的尿素解离浓度下,GICA 检测到 1 份中高 RF-IgM 阳性血清和 14 份 COVID-19 患者血清中的 SARS-CoV-2 IgM 阳性。在 4 mol/L 的尿素解离浓度和低于 0.371 的亲和力指数(AI)设定为阴性时,ELISA 检测到 3 份中高 RF-IgM 阳性血清和 14 份 COVID-19 患者血清中的 SARS-CoV-2 IgM 阳性。中高水平的 RF-IgM 可导致 GICA 和 ELISA 检测 SARS-CoV-2 IgM 出现假阳性反应,尿素解离试验有助于减少 SARS-CoV-2 IgM 假阳性结果。