Suppr超能文献

针对 COVID-19 恢复期血浆的特异性血清学分析。

Target specific serologic analysis of COVID-19 convalescent plasma.

机构信息

Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, NorthShore University HealthSystem, Evanston, Illinois, United States of America.

Genalyte Inc., San Diego, California, United States of America.

出版信息

PLoS One. 2021 Apr 28;16(4):e0249938. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0249938. eCollection 2021.

Abstract

This study compared the performance of four serology assays for Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) and investigated whether COVID-19 disease history correlates with assay performance. Samples were tested at Northshore using the Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 (Roche Diagnostics), Access SARS-CoV-2 IgG anti-RBD (Beckman Coulter), and LIAISON SARS-CoV-2 S1/S2 IgG (DiaSorin) as well as at Genalyte using Maverick Multi-Antigen Serology Panel. The study included one hundred clinical samples collected before December 2019 and ninety-seven samples collected from convalescent plasma donors originally diagnosed with COVID-19 by PCR. COVID-19 disease history was self-reported by the plasma donors. There was no difference in specificity between the assays tested. Clinical sensitivity of these four tests was 98% (Genalyte), 96% (Roche), 92% (DiaSorin), and 87% (Beckman). The only statistically significant differences in clinical sensitivity was between the Beckman assay and both Genalyte and Roche assays. Convalescent plasma donor characteristics and disease symptoms did not correlate with false negative results from the Beckman and DiaSorin assays. All four tests showed high specificity (100%) and varying sensitivities (89-98%). No correlations between disease history and serology results were observed. The Genalyte Multiplex assay showed as good or better sensitivity to three other previously validated assays with FDA Emergency Use Authorizations.

摘要

本研究比较了四种用于 2019 年冠状病毒病(COVID-19)的血清学检测方法,并探讨了 COVID-19 病史是否与检测方法的性能相关。在 Northshore 采用罗氏 Elecsys 抗 SARS-CoV-2(罗氏诊断)、贝克曼库尔特 Access SARS-CoV-2 IgG 抗 RBD、以及 DiaSorin 的 LIAISON SARS-CoV-2 S1/S2 IgG 进行检测,同时在 Genalyte 采用 Maverick 多抗原血清学检测面板进行检测。该研究纳入了一百份于 2019 年 12 月前采集的临床样本,以及九十份来自最初经 PCR 确诊为 COVID-19 的恢复期血浆捐献者的样本。COVID-19 病史由血浆捐献者自行报告。在特异性方面,四种检测方法无差异。这四种检测方法的临床敏感性分别为 98%(Genalyte)、96%(罗氏)、92%(DiaSorin)和 87%(贝克曼)。临床敏感性方面,仅贝克曼检测方法与 Genalyte 和罗氏检测方法之间存在统计学差异。恢复期血浆捐献者的特征和疾病症状与贝克曼和 DiaSorin 检测方法的假阴性结果无相关性。所有四种检测方法均显示出高特异性(100%)和不同的敏感性(89-98%)。未观察到疾病史与血清学结果之间的相关性。Genalyte 多重检测法与其他三种具有 FDA 紧急使用授权的已验证检测方法具有相似或更高的敏感性。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/1a88/8081213/b44937f77c37/pone.0249938.g001.jpg

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