Comparative analysis of three point-of-care lateral flow immunoassays for detection of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies: data from 100 healthcare workers in Brazil

10Citations
Citations of this article
56Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Since the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, Brazil has the third-highest number of confirmed cases and the second-highest number of recovered patients. SARS-CoV-2 detection by real-time RT-PCR is the gold standard but requires a certified laboratory infrastructure with high-cost equipment and trained personnel. However, for large-scale testing, diagnostics should be fast, cost-effective, widely available, and deployed for the community, such as serological tests based on lateral flow immunoassay (LFIA) for IgM/IgG detection. We evaluated three different commercial point-of-care (POC) LFIAs for anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgM and IgG detection in capillary whole blood of 100 healthcare workers (HCW) from São Paulo university hospital previously tested by RT-PCR: (1) COVID-19 IgG/IgM BIO (Bioclin, Brazil), (2) Diagnostic Kit for IgM/IgG Antibody to Coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) (Livzon, China), and (3) SARS-CoV-2 Antibody Test (Wondfo, China). A total of 84 positives and 16 negatives HCW were tested. The data was also analyzed by the number of days post symptoms (DPS) in three groups: <30 (n=26), 30–59 (n=42), and >59 (n=16). The observed sensibility was 85.71%, 47.62%, and 44.05% for Bioclin, Wondfo, and Livzon, respectively, with a specificity of 100% for all LFIA. Bioclin was more sensitive (p<0.01), regardless of the DPS. Thus, the Bioclin may be used as a POC test to monitor SARS-CoV-2 seroconversion in HCW.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Conte, D. D., Carvalho, J. M. A., de Souza Luna, L. K., Faíco-Filho, K. S., Perosa, A. H., & Bellei, N. (2021). Comparative analysis of three point-of-care lateral flow immunoassays for detection of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies: data from 100 healthcare workers in Brazil. Brazilian Journal of Microbiology, 52(3), 1161–1165. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42770-021-00498-z

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free