Selected article for: "detection infection and symptom onset"

Author: Jung, Joanna; Garnett, Emily; Jariwala, Purviben; Pham, Hue; Huang, Rongrong; Benzi, Eduardo; Issaq, Niveen; Matzuk, Martin; Singh, Ila; Devaraj, Sridevi
Title: Clinical Performance of A Semi-Quantitative Assay for SARS-CoV2 IgG and SARS-CoV2 IgM Antibodies
  • Cord-id: 4jjo51tu
  • Document date: 2020_9_19
  • ID: 4jjo51tu
    Snippet: Background While the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection is primarily based on detection of viral RNA, the detection of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies is useful for assessing past prevalence of the disease, and in corroborating a current infection in challenging cases. Sensitive and specific immunoassays provide the ability to identify exposure to SARS-CoV-2, to determine seroconversion, to confirm eligibility for donation of convalescent plasma as well as play an essential part in epidemiological studies.
    Document: Background While the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection is primarily based on detection of viral RNA, the detection of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies is useful for assessing past prevalence of the disease, and in corroborating a current infection in challenging cases. Sensitive and specific immunoassays provide the ability to identify exposure to SARS-CoV-2, to determine seroconversion, to confirm eligibility for donation of convalescent plasma as well as play an essential part in epidemiological studies. We report on the validation of the Ansh Laboratories SARS-CoV-2 IgG and SARS-CoV-2 IgM ELISA immunoassays. These assays were evaluated for detection of anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG and IgM antibodies for clinical use in our hospital as part of an orthogonal testing algorithm recommended by the CDC. Methods Diagnostic specificity and sensitivity of the IgG and IgM ELISA assays were tested using samples confirmed to be negative or positive for COVID-19 by RT-PCR. We also evaluated precision, analytical interference, and cross-reactivity with known cases of infection with other viruses. Additionally, we validated concordance with molecular and other serological testing and evaluated seroconversion in our patient population. Results The IgG and IgM ELISA assays showed acceptable precision, were robust to analytical interference and did not exhibit cross reactivity with specimens positive for common respiratory viruses. Both assays exhibited 95% agreement with a primary screening serological assay utilized at our institution as well as with a reference laboratory semi-quantitative method. Concordance with RT-PCR was excellent >6 days after symptom onset (100%). Conclusions The Ansh SARS-CoV-2 ELISA assays have good analytical performance suitable for clinical use.

    Search related documents:
    Co phrase search for related documents
    • accuracy study and acute infection: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8
    • accuracy study and acute phase: 1, 2
    • accuracy study and additional study: 1
    • accuracy study and long period: 1
    • accurate timely and acute infection: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11
    • accurate timely and acute phase: 1, 2, 3
    • accurate timely and long period: 1
    • accurate timely diagnosis and acute infection: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6
    • accurate timely diagnosis and acute phase: 1, 2
    • accurate timely diagnosis and long period: 1
    • acute infection and additional study: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10
    • acute infection and long period: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15
    • acute infection and low overall sensitivity: 1
    • acute phase and additional study: 1, 2
    • acute phase and long period: 1, 2, 3
    • additional study and long period: 1