Cross Gail B, Naftalin Claire M, Ngiam Jinghao N, Bagdasarian Natasha, Poh Chek M, Goh Yun S, Chia Wan N, Amrun Siti N, Tham Sai M, Teng Hazel, Alagha Rawan, Kumar Shoban K, Tan Shaun S Y, Wang Lin F, Tambyah Paul A, Renia Laurent, Fisher Dale, Ng Lisa F P
Department of Infectious Diseases, National University Health System, Singapore, Singapore.
Department of Medicine, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.
J Med Virol. 2022 Jun;94(6):2460-2470. doi: 10.1002/jmv.27656. Epub 2022 Mar 12.
Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) serology has an evolving role in the diagnosis of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. However, its use in hospitalized patients with acute respiratory symptoms remains unclear. Hospitalized patients with acute respiratory illness admitted to an isolation ward were recruited. All patients had negative nasopharyngeal swab polymerase chain reaction (PCR) for SARS-CoV-2. Serological studies using four separate assays (cPass: surrogate neutralizing enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay [ELISA]; Elecsys: N-antigen based chemiluminescent assay; SFB: S protein flow-based; epitope peptide-based ELISA) were performed on stored plasma collected from patients during the initial hospital stay, and a convalescent visit 4-12 weeks later. Of the 51 patients studied (aged 54, interquartile range 21-84; 62.7% male), no patients tested positive on the Elecsys or cPass assays. Out of 51 patients, 5 had antibodies detected on B-cell Epitope Assay and 3/51 had antibodies detected on SFB assay. These 8 patients with positive serological test to COVID-19 were more likely to have a high-risk occupation (p = 0.039), bacterial infection (p = 0.028), and neutrophilia (p = 0.013) during their initial hospital admission. Discrepant COVID-19 serological findings were observed among those with recent hospital admissions and bacterial infections. The positive serological findings within our cohort raise important questions about the interpretation of sero-epidemiology during the current pandemic.
2019冠状病毒病(COVID-19)血清学在严重急性呼吸综合征冠状病毒2(SARS-CoV-2)感染的诊断中发挥着不断演变的作用。然而,其在有急性呼吸道症状的住院患者中的应用仍不明确。招募了入住隔离病房的有急性呼吸道疾病的住院患者。所有患者的严重急性呼吸综合征冠状病毒2鼻咽拭子聚合酶链反应(PCR)检测均为阴性。使用四种不同检测方法(cPass:替代中和酶联免疫吸附测定[ELISA];Elecsys:基于N抗原的化学发光测定;SFB:基于S蛋白流式细胞术;基于表位肽的ELISA)对患者初次住院期间及4至12周后随访时采集的储存血浆进行血清学研究。在研究的51例患者中(年龄54岁,四分位间距21 - 84岁;62.7%为男性),Elecsys或cPass检测中无患者呈阳性。51例患者中,5例在B细胞表位测定中检测到抗体,3/51在SFB检测中检测到抗体。这8例COVID-19血清学检测呈阳性的患者在初次住院时更有可能从事高风险职业(p = 0.039)、发生细菌感染(p = 0.028)和出现中性粒细胞增多(p = 0.013)。在近期住院和细菌感染患者中观察到COVID-19血清学结果存在差异。我们队列中的阳性血清学结果引发了关于当前大流行期间血清流行病学解读的重要问题。