• FluTrackers.com Inc. does not provide medical advice. Information on this web site is collected from various internet resources, and the FluTrackers board of directors makes no warranty to the safety, efficacy, correctness or completeness of the information posted on this site by any author or poster. The information collated here is for instructional and/or discussion purposes only and is NOT intended to diagnose or treat any disease, illness, or other medical condition. Every individual reader or poster should seek advice from their personal physician/healthcare practitioner before considering or using any interventions that are discussed on this website. By continuing to access this website you agree to consult your personal physican before using any interventions posted on this website, and you agree to hold harmless FluTrackers.com Inc., the board of directors, the members, and all authors and posters for any effects from use of any medication, supplement, vitamin or other substance, device, intervention, etc. mentioned in posts on this website, or other internet venues referenced in posts on this website.
  • We are not asking for any donations. Do not donate to any entity who says they are raising funds for us.

Biochem Med (Zagreb) . Comparison of a rapid immunochromatographic test with a chemiluminescence immunoassay for detection of anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgM an

tetano

Editor, Senior Moderator
Biochem Med (Zagreb)


. 2020 Oct 15;30(3):030901.
doi: 10.11613/BM.2020.030901.
Comparison of a rapid immunochromatographic test with a chemiluminescence immunoassay for detection of anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgM and IgG


Caterina Maria Gambino[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Bruna Lo Sasso[SUP] 1 2 [/SUP], Claudia Colomba[SUP] 3 [/SUP], Rosaria Vincenza Giglio[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Luisa Agnello[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Giulia Bivona[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Marcello Ciaccio[SUP] 1 2 [/SUP]



Affiliations
Free PMC article

Abstract

Introduction: The 2019 Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) has been characterized as a pandemic, representing a serious global public health emergency. Serological tests have been proposed as reliable tools for detecting Coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in infected patients, especially for surveillance or epidemiological purposes. The aim of this study is to evaluate the agreement between the IgM/IgG rapid assays, based on lateral flow immunochromatographic assay, and the fully automated 2019-nCoV IgM and IgG, based on chemiluminescence immunoassay.
Materials and methods: SARS-CoV-2 antibodies were measured with the BIOSYNEX COVID-19 BSS IgM/IgG test (BIOSYNEX, Illkirch-Graffenstaden, France) and the MAGLUMI CLIA (IgM and IgG) (SNIBE - Shenzhen New Industries Biomedical Engineering, Shenzhen, China) in 70 serum samples from patients with PCR-confirmed diagnosis. The strength of the agreement of the two methods was calculated by using the Cohen Kappa index.
Results: The results showed a good grade of concordance between the two immunoassays with a Cohen's kappa coefficient of 0.71 (95%CI: 0.54-0.87) for IgG SARS-CoV-2 antibodies and 0.70 (95%CI: 0.53-0.87) for IgM SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. In addition, the rapid assays BIOSYNEX COVID-19 BSS for detecting SARS-CoV-2 antibodies showed a positive likelihood ratio (LR) of 10.63 (95%CI: 2.79-40.57) for IgG and a LR of 6.79 (95%CI: 2.93-15.69) for IgM.
Conclusion: Our results suggest that the immunochromatographic rapid IgM/IgG test and the chemiluminescence IgM and IgG immunoassay have a good degree of concordance, suggesting that both could be considered as useful tools for epidemiologic surveillance.

Keywords: CLIA; COVID-19; antibodies; immunochromatography; serological test.
 
Back
Top Bottom