Comparison and analysis of various complementary diagnosis methods for the current situation and problems of COVID-19 diagnosis

Huh, H. J.; Kim, D.-M.; Chae, S. L.

We evaluated and compared the diagnostic performance of two types of serological diagnostic tests: enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) and immunochromatographic assay (ICA), and fluorescence immunoassay (FIA) for detection of SARS-CoV-2 antigen and antibody to diagnose COVID-19 infections. This study is aimed to analyze and compare the current status and problems of COVID-19 diagnosis and various alternative diagnostic methods that are viable. The enrolled subjects in our study population were tested with real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR). ELISA and immunochromatographic diagnostic kit were used to diagnose 362 positive and 3010 negative SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR confirmed specimens, and antigen fluorescence immunoassay kit was used on 62 positive and 70 negative SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR confirmed samples for diagnosis. As a result, categorizing by the patient symptom onset days, PCL COVID19 Total Ab EIA (ELISA) showed the sensitivity of 93.4% from 15 to 21 days, 94.2% from over 22 day, and the specificity of 99.97%. PCL COVID19 IgG/IgM Rapid Gold (ICA) had a sensitivity of 86.9%, 97.4%, and the specificity of 98.14% respectively. PCL COVID19 Ag Rapid FIA sensitivity was 93.8% from 0 to 7 days, 71.4% from 8 to 12 day and specificity was 98.57%. In conclusion, COVID-19 Ab ELISA and ICA, and COVID-19 Ag FIA are all complementary and applicable diagnostic methods to resolve the current problems of COVID-19 diagnosis.