Background Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has caused a global pandemic in 2020. Testing is crucial for mitigating public health and economic effects. Serology is considered key to population-level surveillance and potentially individual-level risk assessment. However, immunoassay performance has not been compared on large, identical sample sets. We aimed to investigate the performance of four high-throughput commercial SARS-CoV-2 antibody immunoassays and a novel 384-well ELISA. Methods We did a head-to-head assessment of SARS-CoV-2 IgG assay (Abbott, Chicago, IL, USA), LIAISON SARS-CoV-2 S1/S2 IgG assay (DiaSorin, Saluggia, Italy), Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 assay (Roche, Basel, Switzerland), SARS-CoV-2 Total assay (Siemens, Munich, Germany), and a novel 384-well ELISA (the Oxford immunoassay). We derived sensitivity and specificity from 976 pre-pandemic blood samples (collected between Sept 4, 2014, and Oct 4, 2016) and 536 blood samples from patients with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, collected at least 20 days post symptom onset (collected between Feb 1, 2020, and May 31, 2020). Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were used to assess assay thresholds. Findings At the manufacturers' thresholds, for the Abbott assay sensitivity was 92·7% (95% CI 90·2–94·8) and specificity was 99·9% (99·4–100%); for the DiaSorin assay sensitivity was 95·0% (92·8–96·7) and specificity was 98·7% (97·7–99·3); for the Oxford immunoassay sensitivity was 99·1% (97·8–99·7) and specificity was 99·0% (98·1–99·5); for the Roche assay sensitivity was 97·2% (95·4–98·4) and specificity was 99·8% (99·3–100); and for the Siemens assay sensitivity was 98·1% (96·6–99·1) and specificity was 99·9% (99·4–100%). All assays achieved a sensitivity of at least 98% with thresholds optimised to achieve a specificity of at least 98% on samples taken 30 days or more post symptom onset. Interpretation Four commercial, widely available assays and a scalable 384-well ELISA can be used for SARS-CoV-2 serological testing to achieve sensitivity and specificity of at least 98%. The Siemens assay and Oxford immunoassay achieved these metrics without further optimisation. This benchmark study in immunoassay assessment should enable refinements of testing strategies and the best use of serological testing resource to benefit individuals and population health. Funding Public Health England and UK National Institute for Health Research.
Infections with human parechoviruses (HPeVs) are prevalent in young children and have been associated with mild gastroenteritis and, less frequently, with meningitis and neonatal sepsis. To investigate the involvement of these viruses in respiratory disease, a highly sensitive nested PCR was used to screen a large archive of respiratory specimens, collected between January and December 2007. Respiratory samples had previously been tested for eight respiratory viruses, including respiratory syncytial virus and adenovirus, by PCR. HPeV was detected in 34 of 3,844 specimens, representing 27 of 2,220 study subjects (1.2%). HPeV types were identified by sequencing the VP3/VP1 junction amplified by PCR directly from clinical specimens. The assay could amplify all HPeV types examined with high sensitivity (types 1 and 3 to 6) and also identified HPeV types in all but one of the screen-positive study specimens (25 HPeV1 and eight HPeV6 specimens). Infections with both HPeV1 and HPeV6 were seasonal, with highest frequencies in July and August, and restricted to children aged between 6 months and 5 years. Other respiratory viruses were frequently codetected in HPeV-positive specimens, with significant overrepresentation of adenovirus coinfections (37%). Most HPeV-positive specimens were referred from emergency departments, although no association with specific respiratory symptoms or disease was found. In summary, the low frequency of detection and lack of clear disease associations indicate that HPeV1 and -6 are not major pathogens in individuals presenting with respiratory disease. However, the screening and typing methods developed will be of value in further HPeV testing, including testing for meningitis cases and other suspected HPeV-associated disease presentations.
Rhinovirus infections are the most common cause of viral illness in humans, and there is increasing evidence of their etiological role in severe acute respiratory tract infections (ARTIs). Human rhinoviruses (HRVs) are classified into two species, species A and B, which contain over 100 serotypes, and a recently discovered genetically heterogeneous third species (HRV species C). To investigate their diversity and population turnover, screening for the detection and the genetic characterization of HRV variants in diagnostic respiratory samples was performed by using nested primers for the efficient amplification of the VP4-VP2 region of HRV (and enterovirus) species and serotype identification. HRV species A, B, and C variants were detected in 14%, 1.8%, and 6.8%, respectively, of 456 diagnostic respiratory samples from 345 subjects (6 samples also contained enteroviruses), predominantly among children under age 10 years. HRV species A and B variants were remarkably heterogeneous, with 22 and 6 different serotypes, respectively, detected among 73 positive samples. Similarly, by using a pairwise distance threshold of 0.1, species C variants occurring worldwide were provisionally assigned to 47 different types, of which 15 were present among samples from Edinburgh, United Kingdom. There was a rapid turnover of variants, with only 5 of 43 serotypes detected during both sampling periods. By using divergence thresholds and phylogenetic analysis, several species A and C variants could provisionally be assigned to new types. An initial investigation of the clinical differences between rhinovirus species found HRV species C to be nearly twice as frequently associated with ARTIs than other rhinovirus species, which matches the frequencies of detection of respiratory syncytial virus. The study demonstrates the extraordinary genetic diversity of HRVs, their rapid population turnover, and their extensive involvement in childhood respiratory disease.
Enteroviruses (EV) can cause severe neurological and respiratory infections, and occasionally lead to devastating outbreaks as previously demonstrated with EV-A71 and EV-D68 in Europe. However, these infections are still often underdiagnosed and EV typing data is not currently collected at European level. In order to improve EV diagnostics, collate data on severe EV infections and monitor the circulation of EV types, we have established European non-polio enterovirus network (ENPEN). First task of this cross-border network has been to ensure prompt and adequate diagnosis of these infections in Europe, and hence we present recommendations for non-polio EV detection and typing based on the consensus view of this multidisciplinary team including experts from over 20 European countries. We recommend that respiratory and stool samples in addition to cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) and blood samples are submitted for EV testing from patients with suspected neurological infections. This is vital since viruses like EV-D68 are rarely detectable in CSF or stool samples. Furthermore, reverse transcriptase PCR (RT-PCR) targeting the 5'noncoding regions (5'NCR) should be used for diagnosis of EVs due to their sensitivity, specificity and short turnaround time. Sequencing of the VP1 capsid protein gene is recommended for EV typing; EV typing cannot be based on the 5'NCR sequences due to frequent recombination events and should not rely on virus isolation. Effective and standardized laboratory diagnostics and characterisation of circulating virus strains are the first step towards effective and continuous surveillance activities, which in turn will be used to provide better estimation on EV disease burden.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.