ArticleAnalytical and bioanalytical chemistry2021
Spike vs nucleocapsid SARS-CoV-2 antigen detection: application in nasopharyngeal swab specimens.
Article in Analytical and bioanalytical chemistry, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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
26 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 56 citations in OpenAlex.
- Accuracy of novel antigen rapid diagnostics for SARS-CoV-2: A living systematic review and meta-analysis.PLoS medicine · 2021Pooled it
- The Spike of SARS-CoV-2: Uniqueness and Applications.Frontiers in immunology · 2021Pooled it
- Advancing Laboratory Diagnostics for Future Pandemics: Challenges and Innovations.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Development of Novel ssDNA Aptamers for Detection of Receptor-Binding Domain of SARS-COV‑2.ACS omega · 2025Article
- A compartmentalization-free microfluidic digital assay for detecting picogram levels of protein analytes.Lab on a chip · 2025Article
- SARS-CoV-2 Evolution: Implications for Diagnosis, Treatment, Vaccine Effectiveness and Development.Vaccines · 2024Review
- Modified streptavidin-biotin based lateral flow test strip for rapid detection of SARS-CoV-2 S1 antigen in saliva samples.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Dual-Modal Colorimetric and Surface-Enhanced Raman Scattering (SERS)-Based Lateral Flow Immunoassay for Ultrasensitive Detection of SARS-CoV-2 Using a Plasmonic Gold Nanocrown.Analytical chemistry · 2024Article
- Faradaic Impedimetric Immunosensor for Label-Free Point-of-Care Detection of COVID-19 Antibodies Using Gold-Interdigitated Electrode Array.Biosensors · 2023Article
- Development of an Affordable ELISA Targeting the SARS-CoV-2 Nucleocapsid and Its Application to Samples from the Ongoing COVID-19 Epidemic in Ghana.Molecular diagnosis & therapy · 2023Article
- Diagnostic performance of a novel antigen-capture ELISA for the detection of SARS-CoV-2.Analytical biochemistry · 2023Article
- Immune monitoring of SARS-CoV-2-specific T cell and B cell responses in patients with multiple sclerosis treated with ocrelizumab.Frontiers in immunology · 2023Article
- A highly sensitive nanobody-based immunoassay detecting SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid protein using all-recombinant reagents.Frontiers in immunology · 2023Article
- Review
- SARS-CoV-2 spike antigen quantification by targeted mass spectrometry of a virus-based vaccine.Journal of virological methods · 2022Article
- Performance evaluation of Elecsys SARS-CoV-2 Antigen immunoassay for diagnostic of COVID-19.Journal of medical virology · 2022Article
- Rapid electrochemical immunodetection of SARS-CoV-2 using a pseudo-typed vesicular stomatitis virus model.Talanta · 2022Article
- COVID-19 and the Vasculature: Current Aspects and Long-Term Consequences.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2022Review
- Daily, self-test rapid antigen test to assess SARS-CoV-2 viability in de-isolation of patients with COVID-19.Frontiers in medicine · 2022Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
22 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Public health experts emphasize the need for quick, point-of-care SARS-CoV-2 detection as an effective strategy for controlling virus spread. To this end, many "antigen" detection devices were developed and commercialized. These devices are mostly based on detecting SARS-CoV-2's nucleocapsid protein. Recently, alerts issued by both the FDA and the CDC raised concerns regarding the devices' tendency to exhibit false positive results. In this work, we developed a novel alternative spike-based antigen assay, comprising four high-affinity, specific monoclonal antibodies, directed against different epitopes on the spike's S1 subunit. The assay's performance was evaluated for COVID-19 detection from nasopharyngeal swabs, compared to an in-house nucleocapsid-based assay, composed of novel antibodies directed against the nucleocapsid. Detection of COVID-19 was carried out in a cohort of 284 qRT-PCR positive and negative nasopharyngeal swab samples. The time resolved fluorescence (TRF) ELISA spike assay displayed very high specificity (99%) accompanied with a somewhat lower sensitivity (66% for Ct < 25), compared to the nucleocapsid ELISA assay which was more sensitive (85% for Ct < 25) while less specific (87% specificity). Despite being outperformed by qRT-PCR, we suggest that there is room for such tests in the clinical setting, as cheap and rapid pre-screening tools. Our results further suggest that when applying antigen detection, one must consider its intended application (sensitivity vs specificity), taking into consideration that the nucleocapsid might not be the optimal target. In this regard, we propose that a combination of both antigens might contribute to the validity of the results. Schematic representation of sample collection and analysis. The figure was created using BioRender.com.
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.