Background:: There is limited information to compare the qualitative and semi-quantitative performance of rapid diagnostic tests (RDT) and serology for the assessment of antibodies against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Therefore, the objective of the study was (a) to compare the efficacy of SARS-CoV-2 antibody detection between RDT and laboratory serology, trying to identify appropriate semi-quantitative cut-offs for RDT in relation with quantitative serology values and to (b) evaluate diagnostic accuracy of RDT compared to the NAAT gold standard in an unselected adult population. Methods:: SARS-CoV-2 antibodies were simultaneously measured with lateral flow immunochromatographic assays (LFA), the Cellex qSARS-CoV-2 IgG/IgM Rapid Test (by capillary blood), the iFlash-SARS-CoV-2 IgG/IgM chemiluminescent immunoassay (CLIA) (by venous blood) and the nucleic acid amplification test (NAAT) in samples from in- and out-patients with confirmed, suspected and negative diagnosis of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) attending Udine Hospital (Italy) (March-May 2020). Interpretation of RDT was qualitative (positive/negative) and semi-quantitative based on a chromatographic intensity scale (negative, weak positive, positive). Results:: Overall, 720 paired antibody measures were performed on 858 patients. The qualitative and semiquantitative agreement analysis performed in the whole sample between LFA and CLIA provided a Kendall’s tau of 0.578 (p < 0.001) and of 0.623 (p < 0.001), respectively, for IgM and IgG. In patients with a diagnosis of COVID-19, accordance between LFA and CLIA was maintained as a function of time from the onset of COVID-19 disease and the severity of disease both for qualitative and semi-quantitative assessments. RDT compared to the NAAT gold standard in 858 patients showed 78.5% sensitivity (95% CI 75.1%-81.7%) and 94.1% specificity (95% CI 90.4%-96.8%), with variable accordance depending on the timing from symptom onset. Conclusion:: The RDT used in our study can be a non-invasive and reliable alternative to serological tests and facilitate both qualitative and a semi-quantitative antibody detection in COVID-19.

Evaluation of qualitative and semi-quantitative cut offs for rapid diagnostic lateral flow test in relation to serology for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies: findings of a prospective study

Peghin M.
;
Graziano E.;
2022-01-01

Abstract

Background:: There is limited information to compare the qualitative and semi-quantitative performance of rapid diagnostic tests (RDT) and serology for the assessment of antibodies against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Therefore, the objective of the study was (a) to compare the efficacy of SARS-CoV-2 antibody detection between RDT and laboratory serology, trying to identify appropriate semi-quantitative cut-offs for RDT in relation with quantitative serology values and to (b) evaluate diagnostic accuracy of RDT compared to the NAAT gold standard in an unselected adult population. Methods:: SARS-CoV-2 antibodies were simultaneously measured with lateral flow immunochromatographic assays (LFA), the Cellex qSARS-CoV-2 IgG/IgM Rapid Test (by capillary blood), the iFlash-SARS-CoV-2 IgG/IgM chemiluminescent immunoassay (CLIA) (by venous blood) and the nucleic acid amplification test (NAAT) in samples from in- and out-patients with confirmed, suspected and negative diagnosis of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) attending Udine Hospital (Italy) (March-May 2020). Interpretation of RDT was qualitative (positive/negative) and semi-quantitative based on a chromatographic intensity scale (negative, weak positive, positive). Results:: Overall, 720 paired antibody measures were performed on 858 patients. The qualitative and semiquantitative agreement analysis performed in the whole sample between LFA and CLIA provided a Kendall’s tau of 0.578 (p < 0.001) and of 0.623 (p < 0.001), respectively, for IgM and IgG. In patients with a diagnosis of COVID-19, accordance between LFA and CLIA was maintained as a function of time from the onset of COVID-19 disease and the severity of disease both for qualitative and semi-quantitative assessments. RDT compared to the NAAT gold standard in 858 patients showed 78.5% sensitivity (95% CI 75.1%-81.7%) and 94.1% specificity (95% CI 90.4%-96.8%), with variable accordance depending on the timing from symptom onset. Conclusion:: The RDT used in our study can be a non-invasive and reliable alternative to serological tests and facilitate both qualitative and a semi-quantitative antibody detection in COVID-19.
2022
2022
Antibodies; CLIA; COVID-19; ELISA; Lateral flow immunoassay; POC; Rapid diagnostic test; RDT; SARS-CoV-2; Serology
Peghin, M.; Bontempo, G.; De Martino, M.; Palese, A.; Gerussi, V.; Graziano, E.; Fabris, M.; D'Aurizio, F.; Sbrana, F.; Ripoli, A.; Curcio, F.; Isola,...espandi
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
Evaluation-of-qualitative-and-semiquantitative-cut-offs-for-rapid-diagnostic-lateral-flow-test-in-relation-to-serology-for-the-detection-of-SARSCoV2-antibodies-findings-of-a-prospective-studyBMC-Infectious-Di.pdf

accesso aperto

Tipologia: Versione Editoriale (PDF)
Licenza: Creative commons
Dimensione 1.42 MB
Formato Adobe PDF
1.42 MB Adobe PDF Visualizza/Apri

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11383/2151074
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 2
  • Scopus 6
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 6
social impact