Journal Article

Evaluation of qualitative and semi-quantitative cut offs for rapid diagnostic lateral flow test in relation to serology for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies: findings of a prospective study

Graziano, Elena, Ripoli, Andrea, Gerussi, Valentina, Tascini, Carlo, Curcio, Francesco, Sbrana, Francesco, Bontempo, Giulia, Palese, Alvisa, Isola, Miriam, D’Aurizio, Federica, Peghin, Maddalena, Fabris, Martina, De Martino, Maria

2022

Overview

Background: There is limited information to compare the qualitative and semi-quantitative performance of rapid diagnostic tests (RDT) and serology for the assessment of antibodies against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Therefore, the objective of the study was (a) to compare the efficacy of SARS-CoV-2 antibody detection between RDT and laboratory serology, trying to identify appropriate semi-quantitative cut-offs for RDT in relation with quantitative serology values and to (b) evaluate diagnostic accuracy of RDT compared to the NAAT gold standard in an unselected adult population. Methods: SARS-CoV-2 antibodies were simultaneously measured with lateral flow immunochromatographic assays (LFA), the Cellex qSARS-CoV-2 IgG/IgM Rapid Test (by capillary blood), the iFlash-SARS-CoV-2 IgG/IgM chemiluminescent immunoassay (CLIA) (by venous blood) and the nucleic acid amplification test (NAAT) in samples from in- and out-patients with confirmed, suspected and negative diagnosis of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) attending Udine Hospital (Italy) (March-May 2020). Interpretation of RDT was qualitative (positive/negative) and semi-quantitative based on a chromatographic intensity scale (negative, weak positive, positive). Results: Overall, 720 paired antibody measures were performed on 858 patients. The qualitative and semiquantitative agreement analysis performed in the whole sample between LFA and CLIA provided a Kendall’s tau of 0.578 (p < 0.001) and of 0.623 (p < 0.001), respectively, for IgM and IgG. In patients with a diagnosis of COVID-19, accordance between LFA and CLIA was maintained as a function of time from the onset of COVID-19 disease and the severity of disease both for qualitative and semi-quantitative assessments. RDT compared to the NAAT gold standard in 858 patients showed 78.5% sensitivity (95% CI 75.1%-81.7%) and 94.1% specificity (95% CI 90.4%-96.8%), with variable accordance depending on the timing from symptom onset. Conclusion: The RDT used in our study can be a non-invasive and reliable alternative to serological tests and facilitate both qualitative and a semi-quantitative antibody detection in COVID-19.

• Publisher: BioMed Central,BioMed Central Ltd,Springer Nature B.V,BMC
• Subject: Accuracy / Analysis / Antibodies / Blood / Chemiluminescence / Chromatography / Coronaviruses / COVID-19 / Diagnosis / Diagnostic systems / Diagnostic tests / Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay / Evaluation / Health aspects / Hospitals / Immunoassay / Immunoglobulin G / Immunoglobulin M / Infections / Infectious Diseases / Internal Medicine / Laboratories / Lateral flow immunoassay / Medical Microbiology / Medical tests / Medicine / Medicine & Public Health / Nucleic acids / Pandemics / Parasitology / Patients / Public health / Qualitative analysis / Rapid diagnostic test / Respiratory diseases / SARS-CoV-2 / Serological tests / Serology / Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 / Tropical Medicine / Viral antibodies / Viral diseases