Napodano Cecilia, Callà Cinzia, Fiorita Antonella, Marino Mariapaola, Taddei Eleonora, Di Cesare Tiziana, Passali Giulio Cesare, Di Santo Riccardo, Stefanile Annunziata, Fantoni Massimo, Urbani Andrea, Paludetti Gaetano, Rapaccini Gian Ludovico, Ciasca Gabriele, Basile Umberto
Dipartimento di Scienze Mediche e Chirurgiche, UOC Gastroenterologia, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario "A. Gemelli" IRCCS, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, 00168 Rome, Italy.
Dipartimento di Scienze di Laboratorio e Infettivologiche, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario "A. Gemelli" IRCCS, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, 00168 Rome, Italy.
J Pers Med. 2021 May 8;11(5):385. doi: 10.3390/jpm11050385.
The ongoing outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), which impairs the functionality of several organs, represents a major threat to human health. One of the hardest challenges in the fight against COVID-19 is the development of wide-scale, effective, and rapid laboratory tests to control disease severity, progression, and possible sudden worsening. Monitoring patients in real-time is highly demanded in this pandemic era when physicians need reliable and quantitative tools to prioritize patients' access to intensive care departments. In this regard, salivary biomarkers are extremely promising, as they allow for the fast and non-invasive collection of specimens and can be repeated multiple times.
We compare salivary levels of immunoglobulin A subclasses (IgA1 and IgA2) and free light chains (kFLC and λFLC) in a cohort of 29 SARS-CoV-2 patients and 21 healthy subjects.
We found that each biomarker differs significantly between the two groups, with -values ranging from 10 to 10. A Receiving Operator Curve analysis shows that λFLC level is the best-suited candidate to discriminate the two groups (AUC = 0.96), with an accuracy of 0.94 (0.87-1.00 95% CI), a precision of 0.91 (0.81-1.00 95% CI), a sensitivity of 1.00 (0.96-1.00 95% CI), and a specificity of 0.86 (0.70-1.00 95% CI).
These results suggest λFLC as an ideal indicator of patient conditions. This hypothesis is strengthened by the consideration that the λFLC half-life (approximately 6 h) is significantly shorter than the IgA one (21 days), thus confirming the potential of λFLC for effectively monitoring patients' fluctuation in real-time.
2019年冠状病毒病(COVID-19)的持续爆发对人体健康构成了重大威胁,它会损害多个器官的功能。抗击COVID-19最艰巨的挑战之一是开发大规模、有效且快速的实验室检测方法,以控制疾病的严重程度、进展情况以及可能出现的突然恶化。在这个大流行时代,实时监测患者的需求非常迫切,因为医生需要可靠且定量的工具来确定患者进入重症监护病房的优先级。在这方面,唾液生物标志物极具前景,因为它们可以快速、无创地采集样本,并且可以多次重复检测。
我们比较了29例SARS-CoV-2患者和21名健康受试者唾液中免疫球蛋白A亚类(IgA1和IgA2)以及游离轻链(kFLC和λFLC)的水平。
我们发现两组之间每种生物标志物都有显著差异,P值范围为10至10。接受者操作特征曲线分析表明,λFLC水平是区分两组的最适合候选指标(AUC = 0.96),准确率为0.94(0.87 - 1.00 95%置信区间),精确率为0.91(0.81 - 1.00 95%置信区间),灵敏度为1.00(0.96 - 1.00 95%置信区间),特异性为0.86(0.70 - 1.00 95%置信区间)。
这些结果表明λFLC是患者病情的理想指标。考虑到λFLC的半衰期(约6小时)明显短于IgA的半衰期(21天),这一假设得到了进一步强化,从而证实了λFLC在有效实时监测患者病情波动方面的潜力。