Multiplex

多路复用
  • 文章类型: Letter
    暂无摘要。
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    目前,诊断COVID-19的唯一可靠检测方法是RT-qPCR。血清学测定已被广泛用于提高感染人群的检测灵敏度。特此,我们报告了一种新的泛IgG多重酶免疫分析(免疫点)方法的性能,用于探索不同的SARS-COV-2血清学结果。
    在罗氏和Snibe平台上,对回收的COVID-19受试者的38份残留血清样本进行了回顾性研究,血清学结果不一致,在新的半自动化泛IgG免疫点酶免疫分析上进行了重新分析,即COVIDOT测试,以找到差异的来源并评估后一种方法。在BlueDiver®仪器上分析所有样品,并且使用D0T®软件通过BlueScan®扫描仪读取所有条带。
    根据我们的数据,受试者样本在免疫点条上对≥2种不同抗原显示特异性IgG反应.在这38个样本中,97.4%的样本显示针对S1+S2抗原的特异性IgG反应,89.5%显示抗RBD抗原,在COVIDOT-TEST试剂盒上86.8%的抗S2抗原反应。在73.7%和65.8%的样本中检测到特异性IgG-S1抗原和IgG-N抗原反应,分别。
    新的半自动化泛IgG免疫点酶免疫测定方法似乎是一种可靠的检测方法,可用于确认可疑的COVID-19血清学筛查结果。
    At present, the only reliable test for COVID-19 diagnosis is RT-qPCR. Serological assays have been widely used to increase the detection sensitivity of infected population. Hereby, we report the performance of a new pan-IgG multiplex Enzyme Immunoassay (immunodot) method for exploration of discrepant SARS-COV-2 serological results.
    A retrospective study on 38 residual serum samples from recovered COVID-19 subjects with discordant serological results on Roche and Snibe platforms, were reanalyzed on a new semi-automated pan-IgG immunodot Enzyme Immunoassay, namely COVIDOT-TEST, in order to find the source of discrepancies and to evaluate the latter method. All samples were analyzed on the BlueDiver® Instrument and all strips were read by the BlueScan® Scanner using Dr DOT® Software.
    Based on our data, subject samples showed specific IgG reactions on ≥  2 different antigens on immunodot strips. Of these 38 samples, 97.4 % of samples showed specific IgG reaction against S1 + S2 antigens, 89.5 % showed against RBD antigen, 86.8 % against S2 antigen reaction on the COVIDOT-TEST kit. Specific IgG-S1 antigen and IgG-N antigen reactions were detected in 73.7 % and 65.8 % of the samples, respectively.
    The new semi-automated pan-IgG immunodot Enzyme Immunoassay method appeared to be a reliable assay to confirm suspicious COVID-19 serological screening results.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Sci-hub)

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Comparative Study
    Case-control study for the evaluation of innovative test formats for second-tier testing for the serodiagnosis of Lyme borreliosis (LB). A head-to-head comparison was performed with the test systems ViraStripe, SeraSpot, ViraChip, and recomBead. Serum samples from 62 patients (21 erythema migrans, 33 Lyme neuroborreliosis, 8 late LB) and 91 controls (including 29 potentially cross-reacting sera) were tested. For ViraChip and recomBead, optimised interpretation criteria were developed for both IgG and IgM. The most important modification for the proposed interpretation criteria for ViraChip is the interpretation of strong (> 2.5-fold above cutoff) singular IgG reactions against VlsE as positive. This significantly improves sensitivity (32 to 85%, p < 0.0001) without significant changes in specificity (borderline reactions interpreted as negative). By application of our modified rules, specificity of ViraChip IgM is significantly increased (89 to 97%, p < 0.05; borderline results included to negatives), and sensitivities of recomBead IgG and IgM are also significantly improved (69 to 87%, p < 0.01, and 57 to 74%, p < 0.01, respectively; borderline results included to positives). Further improvement of sensitivity by the rating of strong singular IgG reactions against VlsE as positive can also be shown for recomBead. IgG/IgM result combinations must be interpreted as a function of the assumed disease stage, and the best combinations differ for the various assays. Application of our proposed interpretation criteria significantly improve the discriminatory abilities of two assays; however, this must be confirmed with other data sets. Recommendations from Scientific Societies should be updated as may be necessary.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Sci-hub)

       PDF(Pubmed)

公众号