SARS-CoV-2 IgG对核衣壳和刺突抗原检测的比较评价。

Q3 Medicine Human Antibodies Pub Date : 2021-01-01 DOI:10.3233/HAB-210440
Mitra Rezaei, Mohammadhadi Sadeghi, Alireza Korourian, Payam Tabarsi, Mihan Porabdollah, Elham Askari, Esmaeil Mortaz, Shima Mahmoudi, Majid Marjani, Ali Akbar Velayati
{"title":"SARS-CoV-2 IgG对核衣壳和刺突抗原检测的比较评价。","authors":"Mitra Rezaei,&nbsp;Mohammadhadi Sadeghi,&nbsp;Alireza Korourian,&nbsp;Payam Tabarsi,&nbsp;Mihan Porabdollah,&nbsp;Elham Askari,&nbsp;Esmaeil Mortaz,&nbsp;Shima Mahmoudi,&nbsp;Majid Marjani,&nbsp;Ali Akbar Velayati","doi":"10.3233/HAB-210440","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>There are few studies to compare antibody response against anti-spike (S) and anti- nucleoprotein (N) SARS-CoV-2.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>The aim of this study was to evaluate the IgG antibody production against S and N antigens of the virus and their correlation with the time and severity of the disease.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The IgG antibodies against S and N antigens of SARS-CoV-2 in serum specimens of 72 symptomatic patients who tested real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction positive for SARS-CoV-2 were detected using the ELISA technique. Different antibody response was compared and the correlation with the time from disease onset and the severity was evaluated.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Forty-eight of 72 (67%) patients tested positive for anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies, while 24 (33%) did not have detectable antibodies. Comparison of antibody levels for N and S antibodies showed that they correlate with each other well (r= 0.81; P< 0.001). However, sensitivity of anti-S SARS-CoV-2 IgG and anti-N SARS-CoV-2 IgG was 30% and 60%, during the first 7 days after symptom onset (r= 0.53; P= 0.111), but increased to 73% and 68% at more than 1-week post symptom onset (r= 0.89, P= 0.111), respectively. Cases with positive IgG response showed a decreased CD8+ T cells percentage compared to the negative IgG groups (26 ± 14 vs. 58 ± 32, p= 0.066 in anti-N IgG group and 28 ± 15 vs. 60 ± 45, p= 0.004 in anti-S IgG group, respectively).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Nearly one-third of the confirmed COVID-19 patients had negative serology results. Lower percent positivity at early time points after symptom onset (less than 1 week) was seen using anti-S SARS-COV-2 IgG kit compare to the anti-N SARS-CoV-2 IgG; therefore, clinicians should interpret negative serology results of especially anti-S SARS-CoV-2 IgG with caution.</p>","PeriodicalId":53564,"journal":{"name":"Human Antibodies","volume":"29 2","pages":"109-113"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.3233/HAB-210440","citationCount":"6","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparative evaluation of SARS-CoV-2 IgG assays against nucleocapsid and spike antigens.\",\"authors\":\"Mitra Rezaei,&nbsp;Mohammadhadi Sadeghi,&nbsp;Alireza Korourian,&nbsp;Payam Tabarsi,&nbsp;Mihan Porabdollah,&nbsp;Elham Askari,&nbsp;Esmaeil Mortaz,&nbsp;Shima Mahmoudi,&nbsp;Majid Marjani,&nbsp;Ali Akbar Velayati\",\"doi\":\"10.3233/HAB-210440\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>There are few studies to compare antibody response against anti-spike (S) and anti- nucleoprotein (N) SARS-CoV-2.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>The aim of this study was to evaluate the IgG antibody production against S and N antigens of the virus and their correlation with the time and severity of the disease.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The IgG antibodies against S and N antigens of SARS-CoV-2 in serum specimens of 72 symptomatic patients who tested real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction positive for SARS-CoV-2 were detected using the ELISA technique. Different antibody response was compared and the correlation with the time from disease onset and the severity was evaluated.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Forty-eight of 72 (67%) patients tested positive for anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies, while 24 (33%) did not have detectable antibodies. Comparison of antibody levels for N and S antibodies showed that they correlate with each other well (r= 0.81; P< 0.001). However, sensitivity of anti-S SARS-CoV-2 IgG and anti-N SARS-CoV-2 IgG was 30% and 60%, during the first 7 days after symptom onset (r= 0.53; P= 0.111), but increased to 73% and 68% at more than 1-week post symptom onset (r= 0.89, P= 0.111), respectively. Cases with positive IgG response showed a decreased CD8+ T cells percentage compared to the negative IgG groups (26 ± 14 vs. 58 ± 32, p= 0.066 in anti-N IgG group and 28 ± 15 vs. 60 ± 45, p= 0.004 in anti-S IgG group, respectively).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Nearly one-third of the confirmed COVID-19 patients had negative serology results. Lower percent positivity at early time points after symptom onset (less than 1 week) was seen using anti-S SARS-COV-2 IgG kit compare to the anti-N SARS-CoV-2 IgG; therefore, clinicians should interpret negative serology results of especially anti-S SARS-CoV-2 IgG with caution.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":53564,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Human Antibodies\",\"volume\":\"29 2\",\"pages\":\"109-113\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.3233/HAB-210440\",\"citationCount\":\"6\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Human Antibodies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3233/HAB-210440\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Human Antibodies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3233/HAB-210440","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

摘要

背景:比较抗刺突(S)抗体和抗核蛋白(N)抗体对SARS-CoV-2反应的研究很少。目的:评价病毒S抗原和N抗原IgG抗体的产生及其与发病时间和严重程度的相关性。方法:采用ELISA技术检测72例SARS-CoV-2实时逆转录聚合酶链反应阳性患者血清中SARS-CoV-2 S、N抗原IgG抗体。比较不同抗体反应,并评价与发病时间和严重程度的相关性。结果:72例患者中48例(67%)检测出抗sars - cov -2抗体阳性,24例(33%)未检测到抗体。N抗体和S抗体的抗体水平比较表明,它们之间的相关性很好(r= 0.81;P < 0.001)。而在症状出现后的前7天,抗- s - cov -2 IgG和抗- n - cov -2 IgG的敏感性分别为30%和60% (r= 0.53;P= 0.111),但在症状出现后1周以上分别增加到73%和68% (r= 0.89, P= 0.111)。IgG阳性组CD8+ T细胞百分比较IgG阴性组降低(抗n IgG组为26±14比58±32,p= 0.066;抗s IgG组为28±15比60±45,p= 0.004)。结论:近三分之一的新冠肺炎确诊患者血清学结果为阴性。使用抗s - SARS-COV-2 IgG试剂盒与抗n - SARS-COV-2 IgG相比,在症状出现后(不到1周)的早期时间点的阳性率较低;因此,临床医生应谨慎解释血清学阴性结果,特别是抗SARS-CoV-2 IgG。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Comparative evaluation of SARS-CoV-2 IgG assays against nucleocapsid and spike antigens.

Background: There are few studies to compare antibody response against anti-spike (S) and anti- nucleoprotein (N) SARS-CoV-2.

Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate the IgG antibody production against S and N antigens of the virus and their correlation with the time and severity of the disease.

Methods: The IgG antibodies against S and N antigens of SARS-CoV-2 in serum specimens of 72 symptomatic patients who tested real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction positive for SARS-CoV-2 were detected using the ELISA technique. Different antibody response was compared and the correlation with the time from disease onset and the severity was evaluated.

Results: Forty-eight of 72 (67%) patients tested positive for anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies, while 24 (33%) did not have detectable antibodies. Comparison of antibody levels for N and S antibodies showed that they correlate with each other well (r= 0.81; P< 0.001). However, sensitivity of anti-S SARS-CoV-2 IgG and anti-N SARS-CoV-2 IgG was 30% and 60%, during the first 7 days after symptom onset (r= 0.53; P= 0.111), but increased to 73% and 68% at more than 1-week post symptom onset (r= 0.89, P= 0.111), respectively. Cases with positive IgG response showed a decreased CD8+ T cells percentage compared to the negative IgG groups (26 ± 14 vs. 58 ± 32, p= 0.066 in anti-N IgG group and 28 ± 15 vs. 60 ± 45, p= 0.004 in anti-S IgG group, respectively).

Conclusion: Nearly one-third of the confirmed COVID-19 patients had negative serology results. Lower percent positivity at early time points after symptom onset (less than 1 week) was seen using anti-S SARS-COV-2 IgG kit compare to the anti-N SARS-CoV-2 IgG; therefore, clinicians should interpret negative serology results of especially anti-S SARS-CoV-2 IgG with caution.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Human Antibodies
Human Antibodies Medicine-Immunology and Allergy
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
27
期刊介绍: Human Antibodies is an international journal designed to bring together all aspects of human hybridomas and antibody technology under a single, cohesive theme. This includes fundamental research, applied science and clinical applications. Emphasis in the published articles is on antisera, monoclonal antibodies, fusion partners, EBV transformation, transfections, in vitro immunization, defined antigens, tissue reactivity, scale-up production, chimeric antibodies, autoimmunity, natural antibodies/immune response, anti-idiotypes, and hybridomas secreting interesting growth factors. Immunoregulatory molecules, including T cell hybridomas, will also be featured.
期刊最新文献
Assessment of CD40L and TSAB serum level in Graves disease patients. Development and characterization of three novel mouse monoclonal antibodies targeting spike protein S1 subunit of Middle East Respiratory Syndrome Corona Virus. The role of vitamin D against COVID-19 infection, progression and severity. The rebirth of epitope-based patent claims. Effect of physical exercise on inactivated COVID-19 vaccine antibody response in the elderly.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1