Performance of Commercially Available Rapid Serological Assays for the Detection of SARS-CoV-2 Antibodies.
AuthorsHashem, Anwar M
Alhabbab, Rowa Y
Alfaleh, Mohamed A
Abujamel, Turki S
AL-Somali, Afrah A
Alofi, Fadwa S
Khogeer, Asim A
Alkayyal, Almohanad A
Mahmoud, Ahmad Bakur
Almontashiri, Naif A M
KAUST DepartmentBioscience Program
Biological and Environmental Sciences and Engineering (BESE) Division
KAUST Grant NumberBAS/1/1020/01/01
Permanent link to this recordhttp://hdl.handle.net/10754/664431
MetadataShow full item record
AbstractThe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), continues to spread globally. Although several rapid commercial serological assays have been developed, little is known about their performance and accuracy in detecting SARS-CoV-2-specific antibodies in COVID-19 patient samples. Here, we have evaluated the performance of seven commercially available rapid lateral flow immunoassays (LFIA) obtained from different manufacturers, and compared them to in-house developed and validated ELISA assays for the detection of SARS-CoV-2-specific IgM and IgG antibodies in RT-PCR-confirmed COVID-19 patients. While all evaluated LFIA assays showed high specificity, our data showed a significant variation in sensitivity of these assays, which ranged from 0% to 54% for samples collected early during infection (3-7 days post symptoms onset) and from 54% to 88% for samples collected at later time points during infection (8-27 days post symptoms onset). Therefore, we recommend prior evaluation and validation of these assays before being routinely used to detect IgM and IgG in COVID-19 patients. Moreover, our findings suggest the use of LFIA assays in combination with other standard methods, and not as an alternative.
CitationHashem, A. M., Alhabbab, R. Y., Algaissi, A., Alfaleh, M. A., Hala, S., Abujamel, T. S., … Pain, A. (2020). Performance of Commercially Available Rapid Serological Assays for the Detection of SARS-CoV-2 Antibodies. Pathogens, 9(12), 1067. doi:10.3390/pathogens9121067
SponsorsThe authors extend their appreciation to the deputyship for Research and Innovation, Ministry of Education in Saudi Arabia for funding this research work through the project number (436) to AMH. AP and SH are supported by a faculty baseline funding by KAUST to AP (BAS/1/1020/01/01) and the R3T initiative of KAUST.
JournalPathogens (Basel, Switzerland)
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license.
- Development and multicenter performance evaluation of fully automated SARS-CoV-2 IgM and IgG immunoassays.
- Authors: Qian C, Zhou M, Cheng F, Lin X, Gong Y, Xie X, Li P, Li Z, Zhang P, Liu Z, Hu F, Wang Y, Li Q, Zhu Y, Duan G, Xing Y, Song H, Xu W, Liu BF, Xia F
- Issue date: 2020 Aug 27
- Evaluation of Six Commercial Mid- to High-Volume Antibody and Six Point-of-Care Lateral Flow Assays for Detection of SARS-CoV-2 Antibodies.
- Authors: Charlton CL, Kanji JN, Johal K, Bailey A, Plitt SS, MacDonald C, Kunst A, Buss E, Burnes LE, Fonseca K, Berenger BM, Schnabl K, Hu J, Stokes W, Zelyas N, Tipples G
- Issue date: 2020 Sep 22
- Accuracy of the serological detection of IgG and IgM to SARS-Cov-2: a prospective, cross-sectional study.
- Authors: Pecoraro V, Cassetti T, Meacci M, Gargiulo R, Capobianchi MR, Mussini C, Vecchi E, Pecorari M, Gagliotti C, Trenti T, Sarti M
- Issue date: 2021 Apr 10
- Evaluation of the SARS-CoV-2-IgG response in outpatients by five commercial immunoassays.
- Authors: Wellinghausen N, Voss M, Ivanova R, Deininger S
- Issue date: 2020
- Comparative analysis of three laboratory based serological assays for SARS-CoV-2 in an Australian cohort.
- Authors: Davidson N, Evans J, Giammichele D, Powell H, Hobson P, Teis B, Glover H, Guppy-Coles KB, Robson J
- Issue date: 2020 Dec