UNASSIGNED: The emergence of SARS-CoV-2 has triggered a global pandemic with profound implications for public health. Rapid changes in the pandemic landscape and limitations in in vitro diagnostics led to the introduction of numerous diagnostic devices with variable performance. In this study, we evaluated three commercial serological assays in Brazil for detecting anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies.
UNASSIGNED: We collected 90 serum samples from SARS-CoV-2-negative blood donors and 352 from SARS-CoV-2-positive, unvaccinated patients, categorized by symptom onset. Subsequently, we assessed the diagnostic performance of three commercial enzyme immunoassays: GOLD ELISA (enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay) COVID-19 Ig (immunoglobulin) G + IgM, Anti-SARS-CoV-2 NCP IgM ELISA, and Anti-SARS-CoV-2 NCP IgG ELISA.
UNASSIGNED: Our findings revealed that the GOLD ELISA COVID-19 IgG + IgM exhibited the highest sensitivity (57.7%) and diagnostic odds ratio, surpassing the manufacturer\'s reported sensitivity in most analyzed time frames while maintaining exceptional specificity (98.9%). Conversely, the Anti-SARS-CoV-2 NCP IgG ELISA demonstrated lower sensitivity but aligned with independent evaluations, boasting a specificity of 100%. However, the Anti-SARS-CoV-2 NCP IgM ELISA exhibited lower sensitivity than claimed, particularly in samples collected shortly after positive reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction results. Performance improved 15-21 days after symptom onset and beyond 22 days, but in the first week, both Anti-SARS-CoV-2 NCP IgM ELISA and Anti-SARS-CoV-2 NCP IgG ELISA struggled to differentiate positive and negative samples.
UNASSIGNED: Our study emphasizes the need for standardized validation protocols to address discrepancies between manufacturer-claimed and actual performance. These insights provide essential information for health care practitioners and policymakers regarding the diagnostic capabilities of these assays in various clinical scenarios.

Understanding the antibody response to SARS-CoV-2, the virus responsible for COVID-19, is crucial to comprehending disease progression and the significance of vaccine and therapeutic development. The emergence of highly contagious variants poses a significant challenge to humoral immunity, underscoring the necessity of grasping the intricacies of specific antibodies. This review emphasizes the pivotal role of antibodies in shaping immune responses and their implications for diagnosing, preventing, and treating SARS-CoV-2 infection. It delves into the kinetics and characteristics of the antibody response to SARS-CoV-2 and explores current antibody-based diagnostics, discussing their strengths, clinical utility, and limitations. Furthermore, we underscore the therapeutic potential of SARS-CoV-2-specific antibodies, discussing various antibody-based therapies such as monoclonal antibodies, polyclonal antibodies, anti-cytokines, convalescent plasma, and hyperimmunoglobulin-based therapies. Moreover, we offer insights into antibody responses to SARS-CoV-2 vaccines, emphasizing the significance of neutralizing antibodies in order to confer immunity to SARS-CoV-2, along with emerging variants of concern (VOCs) and circulating Omicron subvariants. We also highlight challenges in the field, such as the risks of antibody-dependent enhancement (ADE) for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies, and shed light on the challenges associated with the original antigenic sin (OAS) effect and long COVID. Overall, this review intends to provide valuable insights, which are crucial to advancing sensitive diagnostic tools, identifying efficient antibody-based therapeutics, and developing effective vaccines to combat the evolving threat of SARS-CoV-2 variants on a global scale.

Ralstonia solanacearum (RS) is a widely recognized phytopathogenic bacterium which is responsible for causing devastating losses in a wide range of economically significant crops. Timely and accurate detection of this pathogen is pivotal to implementing effective disease management strategies and preventing crop losses. This review provides a comprehensive overview of recent advances in immuno-based detection methods for RS. The review begins by introducing RS, highlighting its destructive potential and the need for point-of-care detection techniques. Subsequently, it explores traditional detection methods and their limitations, emphasizing the need for innovative approaches. The main focus of this review is on immuno-based detection methods and it discusses recent advancements in serological detection techniques. Furthermore, the review sheds light on the challenges and prospects of immuno-based detection of RS. It emphasizes the importance of developing rapid, field-deployable assays that can be used by farmers and researchers alike. In conclusion, this review provides valuable insights into the recent advances in immuno-based detection methods for RS.

The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the urgent need for accurate, rapid, and cost-effective diagnostic methods to identify and track the disease. Traditional diagnostic methods, such as PCR and serological assays, have limitations in terms of sensitivity, specificity, and timeliness. To investigate the potential of using protein-peptide hybrid microarray (PPHM) technology to track the dynamic changes of antibodies in the serum of COVID-19 patients and evaluate the prognosis of patients over time. A discovery cohort of 20 patients with COVID-19 was assembled, and PPHM technology was used to track the dynamic changes of antibodies in the serum of these patients. The results were analyzed to classify the patients into different disease severity groups, and to predict the disease progression and prognosis of the patients. PPHM technology was found to be highly effective in detecting the dynamic changes of antibodies in the serum of COVID-19 patients. Four polypeptide antibodies were found to be particularly useful for reflecting the actual status of the patient\'s recovery process and for accurately predicting the disease progression and prognosis of the patients. The findings of this study emphasize the multi-dimensional space of peptides to analyze the high-volume signals in the serum samples of COVID-19 patients and monitor the prognosis of patients over time. PPHM technology has the potential to be a powerful tool for tracking the dynamic changes of antibodies in the serum of COVID-19 patients and for improving the diagnosis and prognosis of the disease.

BackgroundSerological surveys have been the gold standard to estimate numbers of SARS-CoV-2 infections, the dynamics of the epidemic, and disease severity. Serological assays have decaying sensitivity with time that can bias their results, but there is a lack of guidelines to account for this phenomenon for SARS-CoV-2.AimOur goal was to assess the sensitivity decay of seroassays for detecting SARS-CoV-2 infections, the dependence of this decay on assay characteristics, and to provide a simple method to correct for this phenomenon.MethodsWe performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of SARS-CoV-2 serology studies. We included studies testing previously diagnosed, unvaccinated individuals, and excluded studies of cohorts highly unrepresentative of the general population (e.g. hospitalised patients).ResultsOf the 488 screened studies, 76 studies reporting on 50 different seroassays were included in the analysis. Sensitivity decay depended strongly on the antigen and the analytic technique used by the assay, with average sensitivities ranging between 26% and 98% at 6 months after infection, depending on assay characteristics. We found that a third of the included assays departed considerably from manufacturer specifications after 6 months.ConclusionsSeroassay sensitivity decay depends on assay characteristics, and for some types of assays, it can make manufacturer specifications highly unreliable. We provide a tool to correct for this phenomenon and to assess the risk of decay for a given assay. Our analysis can guide the design and interpretation of serosurveys for SARS-CoV-2 and other pathogens and quantify systematic biases in the existing serology literature.

Monkeypox is a zoonosis that re-emerged in 2022, generating cases in non-endemic countries for the disease and creating a public health issue. The rapid increase in the number of cases kindles a need for quick, inexpensive diagnostic tests for the epidemiological control of the disease. The high cost of molecular tests can make this control more difficult to access in poorer regions, with immunological tests being a more viable option. In this mini-review, a search was conducted in the main databases for peptide and protein options that could be used in the development of serological diagnostic tests. Nine viable registres were found, and seven were selected (two patents and five studies). The main studies used the B21R peptide sequence as it is a high immunogenic epitope. In addition, studies on the improvement of these sequences were also found to avoid cross-reactions against other viruses of the same family, proposing a rational approach using multiepitope recombinant proteins. These approaches demonstrated high sensitivity and specificity values and are seen as viable options for developing new tests. New effective serological testing options, when combined with awareness, disease surveillance, early diagnosis, and rapid communication, form a set of key strategies used by health systems to control the spread of the monkeypox virus.

Serological assays detect the presence of specific antibodies in blood. There are urgent and important applications for serological point-of-care (POC) assays. However, available detection methods are either insufficiently sensitive or too complex for POC settings. Here, we demonstrate that lateral flow immunoassay (LFIA), which is arguably the simplest universal molecular detection approach, can serve as a methodological platform for highly sensitive serological POC assays if combined with a simple, fast, and inexpensive electrophoretic step. In this work, we compared such electrophoretically driven LFIA (eLFIA) with conventional LFIA for the detection of immunoglobulins G against hepatitis B and C in serum. The limit of detection of eLFIA was proven to be 1000 times lower than that of conventional LFIA and sufficiently low to support clinical serological tests. eLFIA takes less than 10 min, requires only a minor accessory powered by a small 9 V battery, and can be performed by an untrained person in the POC environment using a 3 μL specimen of finger-prick capillary blood.

More than three years ago, the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) caused the unforeseen COVID-19 pandemic with millions of deaths. In the meantime, SARS-CoV-2 has become endemic and is now part of the repertoire of viruses causing seasonal severe respiratory infections. Due to several factors, among them the development of SARS-CoV-2 immunity through natural infection, vaccination and the current dominance of seemingly less pathogenic strains belonging to the omicron lineage, the COVID-19 situation has stabilized. However, several challenges remain and the possible new occurrence of highly pathogenic variants remains a threat. Here we review the development, features and importance of assays measuring SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibodies (NAbs). In particular we focus on in vitro infection assays and molecular interaction assays studying the binding of the receptor binding domain (RBD) with its cognate cellular receptor ACE2. These assays, but not the measurement of SARS-CoV-2-specific antibodies per se, can inform us of whether antibodies produced by convalescent or vaccinated subjects may protect against the infection and thus have the potential to predict the risk of becoming newly infected. This information is extremely important given the fact that a considerable number of subjects, in particular vulnerable persons, respond poorly to the vaccination with the production of neutralizing antibodies. Furthermore, these assays allow to determine and evaluate the virus-neutralizing capacity of antibodies induced by vaccines and administration of plasma-, immunoglobulin preparations, monoclonal antibodies, ACE2 variants or synthetic compounds to be used for therapy of COVID-19 and assist in the preclinical evaluation of vaccines. Both types of assays can be relatively quickly adapted to newly emerging virus variants to inform us about the magnitude of cross-neutralization, which may even allow us to estimate the risk of becoming infected by newly appearing virus variants. Given the paramount importance of the infection and interaction assays we discuss their specific features, possible advantages and disadvantages, technical aspects and not yet fully resolved issues, such as cut-off levels predicting the degree of in vivo protection.

Equine piroplasmosis (EP) is a vector borne disease caused by apicomplexans protists Babesia caballi (Nuttal et Strickland, 1910) and Theileria equi (Laveran, 1901). Carrier mares may transmit the infection transplacental resulting in neonatal piroplasmosis or abortions. This event has been described for T. equi by several authors over the world, but no evidence for B. caballi has been reported in Europe. In this study, vertical transmission for both parasites in an Italian breed mare has been confirmed using molecular and microscopic tools. Transplacental transmission is an underestimated problem mainly in endemic areas as it not only contributes to the spread and maintenance of the infection, but also produces significant economic losses.

BACKGROUND: Semi-quantitative and quantitative immunoassays are the most commonly used methodology to evaluate immunity post immunization.
OBJECTIVE: To compare four quantitative SARS-CoV-2 serological assays in COVID-19 patients and immunized healthy individuals, cancer patients, and patients with immunosuppressive therapy.
METHODS: 210 serological samples from COVID-19 infection and vaccination cohorts were used to create a serological sample repository. Serological methods from four manufacturers, namely Euroimmun, Roche, Abbott, and DiaSorin, were evaluated for quantitative, semi-quantitative, and qualitative antibody measurements. All four methods measure IgG antibodies against the SARS-CoV-2 spike receptor-binding domain and report the results in Binding Antibody Unit/mL (BAU/mL). A Total Error Allowable (TEa) of ±25% was chosen as the criteria to determine whether two methods are clinically equivalent quantitatively. Semi-quantitative results (titers) were derived using numeric antibody concentration divided by the cut-off value for each method.
RESULTS: All paired quantitative comparisons demonstrated unacceptable performance. With ±25% as TEa, the best agreement was 74 (35.2% out of 210 samples) between Euroimmun and DiaSorin, whereas the lowest agreement was 11 (5.2% out of 210 samples) between Euroimmun and Roche. Antibody titers amongst all four methods were significantly different (p < 0.001). The highest titer difference from the same sample is between Roche and DiaSorin with a 1392-fold difference. On qualitative comparison, none of the paired comparison showed acceptable comparison (p < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: Poor correlation exists between four evaluated assays, quantitatively, semi-quantitatively, and qualitatively. Further harmonization of assays is required to achieve comparable measurements.