ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology2008
Sensitive and specific enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay using chemiluminescence for detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome viral infection.
Article in Journal of clinical microbiology, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- CoVSense: Ultrasensitive Nucleocapsid Antigen Immunosensor for Rapid Clinical Detection of Wildtype and Variant SARS-CoV-2.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2023Article
- The SARS-CoV-2 specific IgG antibodies biophotonic sensor.Journal of biophotonics · 2023Article
- Aptamer/antibody sandwich method for digital detection of SARS-CoV2 nucleocapsid protein.Talanta · 2022Article
- Recent advances in immunoassay technologies for the detection of human coronavirus infections.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2022Review
- Performance and usefulness of a novel automated immunoassay HISCL SARS-CoV-2 Antigen assay kit for the diagnosis of COVID-19.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- Developments in biosensors for CoV detection and future trends.Biosensors & bioelectronics · 2021Article
- Monitoring Coronavirus Disease 2019: A Review of Available Diagnostic Tools.Frontiers in public health · 2021Review
- Rapid Antibody-Based COVID-19 Mass Surveillance: Relevance, Challenges, and Prospects in a Pandemic and Post-Pandemic World.Journal of clinical medicine · 2020Review
- Detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) coronavirus nucleocapsid protein in human serum using a localized surface plasmon coupled fluorescence fiber-optic biosensor.Biosensors & bioelectronics · 2009Article
- Elevated plasma surfactant protein D (SP-D) levels and a direct correlation with anti-severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-specific IgG antibody in SARS patients.Scandinavian journal of immunology · 2009Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Here we report the development of a more-sensitive immunoassay for severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) based on an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay using chemiluminescence (CLEIA) to detect the viral nucleocapsid (N) antigen in nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA) from patients infected with SARS coronavirus (CoV). The CLEIA was established with an optical combination of monoclonal antibodies (MAbs) against SARS CoV N protein prepared from mice immunized with recombinant N protein without cultivating the virus. The capture and detecting MAbs of the CLEIA reacted to the carboxyl-terminal and amino-terminal peptides of the N protein, respectively. The CLEIA was capable of detecting recombinant N protein at 1.56 pg/ml and viral N protein in SARS CoV cell culture lysates at 0.087 of 50% tissue culture infective doses/ml. The CLEIA showed no cross-reactivities to recombinant N proteins of common human CoV (229E, OC43, and NL63) or lysates of cells infected with 229E and OC43. In addition, an evaluation with 18 SARS-positive NPA samples, all confirmed SARS positive by quantitative PCR and antibodies to SARS CoV, revealed that all (18/18) were found positive by the CLEIA; thus, the sensitivity of detection was 100%. When we tested 20 SARS-negative NPA samples, the CLEIA was shown to have high specificity (100%). The sensitivity of our novel SARS CLEIA was significantly higher than the previous EIA and comparable to the other methods using reverse transcription-PCR.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.