4.6 Article

Serum SARS-CoV-2 Antigens for the Determination of COVID-19 Severity

期刊

VIRUSES-BASEL
卷 14, 期 8, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/v14081653

关键词

COVID-19; SARS-CoV-2; RT-PCR; antigenic assay; prognosis test

类别

资金

  1. Shenzhen YHLO Biotech Co.

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study evaluates the kinetics of serum N antigens and compares their clinical performance with NP RT-PCR. The results suggest that sensitive detection of N antigens in serum can serve as a valuable marker for COVID-19 diagnosis and evaluation of disease severity.
The diagnostic of SARS-CoV-2 infection relies on reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reactions (RT-PCRs) performed on nasopharyngeal (NP) swabs. Nevertheless, false-negative results can be obtained with inadequate sampling procedures, making the use of other biological matrices worthy of investigation. This study aims to evaluate the kinetics of serum N antigens in severe and non-severe patients and compare the clinical performance of serum antigenic assays with NP RT-PCR. Ninety patients were included in the study and monitored for several days. Disease severity was determined according to the WHO clinical progression scale. Serum N antigen levels were measured with a chemiluminescent assay (CLIA) and the Single Molecular Array (Simoa) assay. Viremia thresholds for severity were determined and proposed. In severe patients, the peak antigen response was observed 7 days after the onset of symptoms, followed by a decline. No real peak response was observed in non-severe patients. Severity thresholds for the Simoa and the CLIA provided positive likelihood ratios of 30.0 and 10.9 for the timeframe between day 2 and day 14, respectively. Sensitive detection of N antigens in serum may thus provide a valuable new marker for COVID-19 diagnosis and evaluation of disease severity. When assessed during the first 2 weeks since the onset of symptoms, it may help in identifying patients at risk of developing severe COVID-19 to optimize better intensive care utilization.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据