Suppr超能文献

PCR 检测到 SARS-CoV-2 感染后对 SARS-CoV-2 核衣壳蛋白和抗刺突蛋白 1-RBD 抗体的纵向评估。

Longitudinal Assessment of SARS-CoV-2 Antinucleocapsid and Antispike-1-RBD Antibody Testing Following PCR-Detected SARS-CoV-2 Infection.

机构信息

Department of Laboratory Medicine, Yale University, New Haven, CT.

出版信息

J Appl Lab Med. 2021 Jul 7;6(4):1005-1011. doi: 10.1093/jalm/jfab030.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

SARS-CoV-2 serologic assays are becoming increasingly available and may serve as a diagnostic aid in a multitude of settings relating to past infection status. However, there is limited literature detailing the longitudinal performance of EUA-cleared serologic assays in US populations, particularly in cohorts with a remote history of PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection (e.g., >2 months).

METHODS

We evaluated the diagnostic sensitivities and specificities of the Elecsys® Anti-SARS-CoV-2 (anti-N) and Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 S (anti-S1-RBD) assays, using 174 residual clinical samples up to 267 days post-PCR diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection (n = 154) and a subset of samples obtained prior to the COVID-19 pandemic as negative controls (n = 20).

RESULTS

The calculated diagnostic sensitivities for the anti-N and anti-S1-RBD assays were 89% and 93%, respectively. Of the 154 samples in the SARS-CoV-2-positive cohort, there were 6 discrepant results between the anti-N and anti-S1-RBD assays, 5 of which were specimens collected ≥200 days post-PCR positivity and only had detectable levels of anti-S1-RBD antibodies. When only considering specimens collected ≥100 days post-PCR positivity (n = 41), the sensitivities for the anti-N and anti-S1-RBD assays were 85% and 98%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The anti-S1-RBD assay demonstrated superior sensitivity at time points more remote to the PCR detection date, with 6 more specimens from the SARS-CoV-2-positive cohort detected, 5 of which were collected more than 200 days post-PCR positivity. While analytical differences and reagent lot-to-lot variability are possible, this may indicate that, in some instances, anti-S1-RBD antibodies may persist longer in vivo and may be a better target for detecting remote SARS-CoV-2 infection.

摘要

背景

SARS-CoV-2 血清学检测试剂的应用越来越广泛,可能在与过去感染状态相关的多种情况下作为诊断辅助手段。然而,关于美国人群中 EUA 批准的血清学检测试剂的纵向性能,尤其是在具有 PCR 确诊 SARS-CoV-2 感染的遥远病史的队列中(例如,>2 个月),文献资料有限。

方法

我们评估了 Elecsys® Anti-SARS-CoV-2(抗 N)和 Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 S(抗 S1-RBD)检测试剂的诊断灵敏度和特异性,使用了 174 份残留临床样本,这些样本的 PCR 诊断 SARS-CoV-2 感染后时间长达 267 天(n=154),并选择了一部分在 COVID-19 大流行之前采集的样本作为阴性对照(n=20)。

结果

抗 N 和抗 S1-RBD 检测试剂的计算诊断灵敏度分别为 89%和 93%。在 SARS-CoV-2 阳性队列的 154 份样本中,抗 N 和抗 S1-RBD 检测试剂之间有 6 份结果不一致,其中 5 份样本采集于 PCR 阳性后≥200 天,仅检测到抗 S1-RBD 抗体的可检测水平。当仅考虑采集于 PCR 阳性后≥100 天的样本(n=41)时,抗 N 和抗 S1-RBD 检测试剂的灵敏度分别为 85%和 98%。

结论

抗 S1-RBD 检测试剂在距离 PCR 检测日期更远的时间点显示出更高的灵敏度,在 SARS-CoV-2 阳性队列中多检测到 6 份样本,其中 5 份样本采集于 PCR 阳性后超过 200 天。虽然可能存在分析差异和试剂批间变异性,但这可能表明,在某些情况下,抗 S1-RBD 抗体在体内可能持续存在更长时间,并且可能是检测遥远 SARS-CoV-2 感染的更好靶标。

相似文献

3
5
6
Limited Diagnostic Utility of SARS-CoV-2 Serologic Testing in Symptomatic PCR Negative Patients.
J Appl Lab Med. 2021 Jul 7;6(4):1083-1085. doi: 10.1093/jalm/jfab021.
7
Comparison of Two Automated Immunoassays for the Detection of SARS-CoV-2 Nucleocapsid Antibodies.
J Appl Lab Med. 2021 Mar 1;6(2):429-440. doi: 10.1093/jalm/jfaa175.
8
Serological testing for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in clinical practice: A comparative diagnostic accuracy study.
Allergy. 2022 Jul;77(7):2090-2103. doi: 10.1111/all.15206. Epub 2022 Jan 11.
9
Comparison of 2 fully automated tests detecting antibodies against nucleocapsid N and spike S1/S2 proteins in COVID-19.
Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 2021 Jan;99(1):115197. doi: 10.1016/j.diagmicrobio.2020.115197. Epub 2020 Aug 29.
10
Dynamic changes in anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies during SARS-CoV-2 infection and recovery from COVID-19.
Nat Commun. 2020 Nov 27;11(1):6044. doi: 10.1038/s41467-020-19943-y.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验