Clinical performance evaluation of a SARS-CoV-2 Rapid Antibody Test for determining past exposure to SARS-CoV-2
Objectives: Due to the number of asymptomatic infections and limited access to high-performance antibody tests, the true prevalence and seropositivity of SARS-CoV-2 infection remains unknown. To fill this gap, the clinical performance of a point-of-care SARS-CoV-2 Rapid Antibody Assay, a chromatographic immunoassay for detecting IgM/IgG antibodies, in near patient settings was assessed. Methods: Forty-two anti-SARS-Cov-2 positive (CoV+) and 92 anti-SARS-Cov-2 negative (CoV–) leftover samples from before December 2019 were assessed; the Elecsys® Anti-SARS-CoV-2 was used as the reference assay. Analytical specificity was tested using leftover samples collected before December 2019 from patients with common cold symptoms. Results: The SARS-CoV-2 Rapid Antibody Test was 100.0% (95% CI 91.59–100.0) sensitive and 96.74% (95% CI 90.77–99.32) specific, with 0.00% assay failure rate. No cross-reactivity was observed against the common cold panel. Method comparison was additionally conducted by two external laboratories, using 100 CoV+ and 275 CoV– samples, also comparing whole blood versus plasma matrix. The comparison demonstrated 96.00% positive and 96.36% negative percent agreement for plasma with the Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 and 99.20% percent overall agreement between whole blood and EDTA plasma. Conclusion: The SARS-CoV-2 Rapid Antibody Test demonstrated similar performance to the manufacturer’s data and a centralised automated immunoassay, with no cross-reactivity with common cold panels..
| Medienart: |
E-Artikel |
|---|
| Erscheinungsjahr: |
2021 |
|---|---|
| Erschienen: |
2021 |
| Enthalten in: |
Zur Gesamtaufnahme - volume:103 |
|---|---|
| Enthalten in: |
International Journal of Infectious Diseases - 103(2021), Seite 636-641 |
| Sprache: |
Englisch |
|---|
| Beteiligte Personen: |
Peter Findeisen [VerfasserIn] |
|---|
| Links: |
doi.org [kostenfrei] |
|---|
| Themen: |
Infectious and parasitic diseases |
|---|
| doi: |
10.1016/j.ijid.2020.11.164 |
|---|
| funding: |
|
|---|---|
| Förderinstitution / Projekttitel: |
|
| PPN (Katalog-ID): |
DOAJ071897216 |
|---|
| LEADER | 01000caa a22002652 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | DOAJ071897216 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20230502220647.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 230228s2021 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1016/j.ijid.2020.11.164 |2 doi | |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)DOAJ071897216 | ||
| 035 | |a (DE-599)DOAJ9e7eb62ad93b4f99b143942d531de435 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 050 | 0 | |a RC109-216 | |
| 100 | 0 | |a Peter Findeisen |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Clinical performance evaluation of a SARS-CoV-2 Rapid Antibody Test for determining past exposure to SARS-CoV-2 |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2021 | |
| 336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a Computermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 520 | |a Objectives: Due to the number of asymptomatic infections and limited access to high-performance antibody tests, the true prevalence and seropositivity of SARS-CoV-2 infection remains unknown. To fill this gap, the clinical performance of a point-of-care SARS-CoV-2 Rapid Antibody Assay, a chromatographic immunoassay for detecting IgM/IgG antibodies, in near patient settings was assessed. Methods: Forty-two anti-SARS-Cov-2 positive (CoV+) and 92 anti-SARS-Cov-2 negative (CoV–) leftover samples from before December 2019 were assessed; the Elecsys® Anti-SARS-CoV-2 was used as the reference assay. Analytical specificity was tested using leftover samples collected before December 2019 from patients with common cold symptoms. Results: The SARS-CoV-2 Rapid Antibody Test was 100.0% (95% CI 91.59–100.0) sensitive and 96.74% (95% CI 90.77–99.32) specific, with 0.00% assay failure rate. No cross-reactivity was observed against the common cold panel. Method comparison was additionally conducted by two external laboratories, using 100 CoV+ and 275 CoV– samples, also comparing whole blood versus plasma matrix. The comparison demonstrated 96.00% positive and 96.36% negative percent agreement for plasma with the Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 and 99.20% percent overall agreement between whole blood and EDTA plasma. Conclusion: The SARS-CoV-2 Rapid Antibody Test demonstrated similar performance to the manufacturer’s data and a centralised automated immunoassay, with no cross-reactivity with common cold panels. | ||
| 650 | 4 | |a SARS-CoV-2 | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Rapid antibody test | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Past exposure | |
| 653 | 0 | |a Infectious and parasitic diseases | |
| 700 | 0 | |a Hugo Stiegler |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 0 | |a Eloisa Lopez-Calle |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 0 | |a Tanja Schneider |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 0 | |a Eva Urlaub |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 0 | |a Johannes Hayer |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 0 | |a Claudia Zemmrich |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i In |t International Journal of Infectious Diseases |d Elsevier, 2015 |g 103(2021), Seite 636-641 |w (DE-627)DOAJ000043923 |x 18783511 |7 nnns |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:103 |g year:2021 |g pages:636-641 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijid.2020.11.164 |z kostenfrei |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://doaj.org/article/9e7eb62ad93b4f99b143942d531de435 |z kostenfrei |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1201971220324747 |z kostenfrei |
| 856 | 4 | 2 | |u https://doaj.org/toc/1201-9712 |y Journal toc |z kostenfrei |
| 912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_A | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_DOAJ | ||
| 912 | |a SSG-OLC-PHA | ||
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| 952 | |d 103 |j 2021 |h 636-641 | ||