4.2 Article

Analytical performance of lateral flow immunoassay for SARS-CoV-2 exposure screening on venous and capillary blood samples

Journal

JOURNAL OF IMMUNOLOGICAL METHODS
Volume 489, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jim.2020.112909

Keywords

SARS-CoV-2; COVID-19; Serology; Lateral flow immunoassay; Validation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The lateral flow immunoassay Biolidics 2019-nCoV IgG/IgM Detection Kit showed comparable clinical performance to ELISA in detecting SARS-CoV-2 antibodies, with high sensitivity and specificity. There was consistent performance across different sample types, suggesting the potential for decentralized rapid testing and self-testing for anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies.
Objectives: We validate the use of a lateral flow immunoassay (LFI) intended for rapid screening and qualitative detection of anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgM and IgG in serum, plasma, and whole blood, and compare results with ELISA. We also seek to establish the value of LFI testing on blood obtained from a capillary blood sample. Methods: Samples collected by venous blood draw and finger stick were obtained from patients with SARS-CoV-2 detected by RT-qPCR and control patients. Samples were tested with Biolidics 2019-nCoV IgG/IgM Detection Kit lateral flow immunoassay, and antibody calls were compared with ELISA. Results: Biolidics LFI showed clinical sensitivity of 92% with venous blood at 7 days after PCR diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2. Test specificity was 92% for IgM and 100% for IgG. There was no significant difference in detecting IgM and IgG with Biolidics LFI and ELISA at D0 and D7 (p = 1.00), except for detection of IgM at D7 (p = 0.04). Capillary blood of SARS-CoV-2 patients showed 93% sensitivity for antibody detection. Conclusions: Clinical performance of Biolidics 2019-nCoV IgG/IgM Detection Kit is comparable to ELISA and was consistent across sample types. This provides an opportunity for decentralized rapid testing and may allow point-of-care and longitudinal self-testing for the presence of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available