Trial reportBiochemia medica2020
Comparison of a rapid immunochromatographic test with a chemiluminescence immunoassay for detection of anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgM and IgG.
Trial report in Biochemia medica, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 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
18 citing papers in PubMed, 31 citations in OpenAlex.
- Serological reactivity of inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccine based on an S-RBD neutralizing antibody assay.International journal of infectious diseases : IJID : official publication of the International Society for Infectious Diseases · 2022Trial
- Short-term effects of COVID-19 vaccines on cardiac biomarkers: A comparative study between Pfizer/BioNTech and Sinopharm.Qatar medical journal · 2024Article
- Evaluation of the analytical performance of three chemiluminescence serological assays for detecting anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies.Clinical and experimental medicine · 2023Article
- Simulating and estimating agreement in the presence of multiple raters and covariates.Statistics in medicine · 2023Article
- Colorimetric and Raman dual-mode lateral flow immunoassay detection of SARS-CoV-2 N protein antibody based on Ag nanoparticles with ultrathin Au shell assembled onto FeAnalytical and bioanalytical chemistry · 2023Article
- Article
- Antibody response after two doses of homologous or heterologous SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in healthcare workers at health promotion centers: A prospective observational study.Journal of medical virology · 2022Observational
- Determining the SARS-CoV-2 serological immunoassay test performance indices based on the test results frequency distribution.Biochemia medica · 2022Article
- The apparent prevalence, the true prevalence.Biochemia medica · 2022Review
- Longitudinal analysis of anti-SARS-CoV-2 S-RBD IgG antibodies before and after the third dose of the BNT162b2 vaccine.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Review
- Novel nanostructure-coupled biosensor platform for one-step high-throughput quantification of serum neutralizing antibody after COVID-19 vaccination.Biosensors & bioelectronics · 2022Article
- Pfizer-BioNTech and Sinopharm: A Comparative Study on Post-Vaccination Antibody Titers.Vaccines · 2021Article
- Development and Efficacy of Lateral Flow Point-of-Care Testing Devices for Rapid and Mass COVID-19 Diagnosis by the Detections of SARS-CoV-2 Antigen and Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Antibodies.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
- Evaluation of Anti-SARS-Cov-2 S-RBD IgG Antibodies after COVID-19 mRNA BNT162b2 Vaccine.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Current status of the lateral flow immunoassay for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 in nasopharyngeal swabs.Biochemia medica · 2021Review
- Adaptive immune responses to SARS-CoV-2.Advanced drug delivery reviews · 2021Review
- Clinical Value of SARS-CoV2 IgM and IgG Antibodies in Diagnosis of COVID-19 in Suspected Cases.Journal of inflammation research · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe 2019 Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) has been characterized as a pandemic, representing a serious global public health emergency. Serological tests have been proposed as reliable tools for detecting Coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in infected patients, especially for surveillance or epidemiological purposes. The aim of this study is to evaluate the agreement between the IgM/IgG rapid assays, based on lateral flow immunochromatographic assay, and the fully automated 2019-nCoV IgM and IgG, based on chemiluminescence immunoassay. MATERIALS AND
methodsSARS-CoV-2 antibodies were measured with the BIOSYNEX COVID-19 BSS IgM/IgG test (BIOSYNEX, Illkirch-Graffenstaden, France) and the MAGLUMI CLIA (IgM and IgG) (SNIBE - Shenzhen New Industries Biomedical Engineering, Shenzhen, China) in 70 serum samples from patients with PCR-confirmed diagnosis. The strength of the agreement of the two methods was calculated by using the Cohen Kappa index.
resultsThe results showed a good grade of concordance between the two immunoassays with a Cohen's kappa coefficient of 0.71 (95%CI: 0.54-0.87) for IgG SARS-CoV-2 antibodies and 0.70 (95%CI: 0.53-0.87) for IgM SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. In addition, the rapid assays BIOSYNEX COVID-19 BSS for detecting SARS-CoV-2 antibodies showed a positive likelihood ratio (LR) of 10.63 (95%CI: 2.79-40.57) for IgG and a LR of 6.79 (95%CI: 2.93-15.69) for IgM.
conclusionOur results suggest that the immunochromatographic rapid IgM/IgG test and the chemiluminescence IgM and IgG immunoassay have a good degree of concordance, suggesting that both could be considered as useful tools for epidemiologic surveillance.
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.