Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2020 Jul 24;9(8):2369.
doi: 10.3390/jcm9082369.

Head-to-Head Accuracy Comparison of Three Commercial COVID-19 IgM/IgG Serology Rapid Tests

Affiliations

Head-to-Head Accuracy Comparison of Three Commercial COVID-19 IgM/IgG Serology Rapid Tests

Diego O Andrey et al. J Clin Med. .

Abstract

Background: Comparative data of SARS-CoV-2 IgM/IgG serology rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) is scarce. We thus performed a head-to-head comparison of three RDTs.

Methods: In this unmatched case-control study, blood samples from 41 RT-PCR-confirmed COVID-19 cases and 50 negative controls were studied. The diagnostic accuracy of three commercially available COVID-19 RDTs: NTBIO (RDT-A), Orient-Gene (RDT-B), and MEDsan (RDT-C), against both a recombinant spike-expressing immunofluorescence assay (rIFA) and Euroimmun IgG ELISA, was assessed. RDT results concordant with the reference methods, and between whole blood and plasma, were established by the Kendall coefficient.

Results: COVID-19 cases' median time from RT-PCR to serology was 22 days (interquartile range (IQR) 13-31 days). Whole-blood IgG detection with RDT-A, -B, and -C showed 0.93, 0.83, and 0.98 concordance with rIFA. Against rIFA, RDT-A sensitivity (SN) was 92% (95% CI: 78-98) and specificity (SP) 100% (95% CI: 91-100), RDT-B showed 87% SN (95% CI: 72-95) and 98% SP (95% CI: 88-100), and RDT-C 100% SN (95% CI: 88-100) and 98% SP (95% CI: 88-100). Against ELISA, SN and SP were above 90% for all three RDTs.

Conclusions: RDT-A and RDT-C displayed IgG detection SN and SP above 90% in whole blood. These RDTs could be considered in the absence of routine diagnostic serology facilities.

Keywords: COVID-19; ELISA; IgM/IgG serology; SARS-CoV-2; immunofluorescence; rapid test.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflicts of interest

References

    1. WHO “Immunity Passports” in the Context of COVID-19. [(accessed on 20 June 2020)]; Available online: https://www.who.int/publications-detail/immunity-passports-in-the-contex....
    1. Hoffman T., Nissen K., Krambrich J., Ronnberg B., Akaberi D., Esmaeilzadeh M., Salaneck E., Lindahl J., Lundkvist A. Evaluation of a COVID-19 IgM and IgG rapid test; an efficient tool for assessment of past exposure to SARS-CoV-2. Infect. Ecol. Epidemiol. 2020;10:1754538. doi: 10.1080/20008686.2020.1754538. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Shen B., Zheng Y., Zhang X., Zhang W., Wang D., Jin J., Lin R., Zhang Y., Zhu G., Zhu H., et al. Clinical evaluation of a rapid colloidal gold immunochromatography assay for SARS-Cov-2 IgM/IgG. Am. J. Transl. Res. 2020;12:1348–1354. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Cassaniti I., Novazzi F., Giardina F., Salinaro F., Sachs M., Perlini S., Bruno R., Mojoli F., Baldanti F., Members of the San Matteo Pavia COVID-19 Task Force Performance of VivaDiag COVID-19 IgM/IgG Rapid Test is inadequate for diagnosis of COVID-19 in acute patients referring to emergency room department. J. Med. Virol. 2020 doi: 10.1002/jmv.25800. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Li Z., Yi Y., Luo X., Xiong N., Liu Y., Li S., Sun R., Wang Y., Hu B., Chen W., et al. Development and clinical application of a rapid IgM-IgG combined antibody test for SARS-CoV-2 infection diagnosis. J. Med. Virol. 2020 doi: 10.1002/jmv.25727. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources