MRC-University of Glasgow Centre for Virus Research, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, United Kingdom.
School of Mathematics & Statistics, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, United Kingdom.
Front Immunol. 2023 Sep 18;14:1184362. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2023.1184362. eCollection 2023.
The virus neutralization assay is a principal method to assess the efficacy of antibodies in blocking viral entry. Due to biosafety handling requirements of viruses classified as hazard group 3 or 4, pseudotyped viruses can be used as a safer alternative. However, it is often queried how well the results derived from pseudotyped viruses correlate with authentic virus. This systematic review and meta-analysis was designed to comprehensively evaluate the correlation between the two assays.
Using PubMed and Google Scholar, reports that incorporated neutralisation assays with both pseudotyped virus, authentic virus, and the application of a mathematical formula to assess the relationship between the results, were selected for review. Our searches identified 67 reports, of which 22 underwent a three-level meta-analysis.
The three-level meta-analysis revealed a high level of correlation between pseudotyped viruses and authentic viruses when used in an neutralisation assay. Reports that were not included in the meta-analysis also showed a high degree of correlation, with the exception of lentiviral-based pseudotyped Ebola viruses.
Pseudotyped viruses identified in this report can be used as a surrogate for authentic virus, though care must be taken in considering which pseudotype core to use when generating new uncharacterised pseudotyped viruses.
病毒中和测定法是评估抗体阻断病毒进入的功效的主要方法。由于 3 级或 4 级危害组的病毒的生物安全处理要求,可使用假型病毒作为更安全的替代物。但是,人们经常质疑源自假型病毒的结果与真实病毒的相关性如何。本系统评价和荟萃分析旨在全面评估这两种检测方法之间的相关性。
使用 PubMed 和 Google Scholar,选择了同时包含假型病毒、真实病毒中和测定法和应用数学公式评估结果之间关系的报告进行综述。我们的检索确定了 67 份报告,其中 22 份进行了三级荟萃分析。
三级荟萃分析显示,在中和测定法中使用假型病毒和真实病毒时,两者具有高度相关性。未纳入荟萃分析的报告也显示出高度相关性,但基于慢病毒的埃博拉病毒假型病毒除外。
本报告中鉴定的假型病毒可作为真实病毒的替代物,但在生成新的未表征的假型病毒时,必须谨慎考虑使用哪种假型核心。