ArticleJournal of clinical virology : the official publication of the Pan American Society for Clinical Virology2021
Evaluation of SARS-CoV-2 total antibody detection via a lateral flow nanoparticle fluorescence immunoassay.
Article in Journal of clinical virology : the official publication of the Pan American Society for Clinical Virology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Drug-Tolerant, Chemiluminescent Lateral Flow Immunoassay Platform for the Determination of Neutralizing Anti-Drug Antibodies.Small (Weinheim an der Bergstrasse, Germany) · 2025Article
- Nanotechnology's frontier in combatting infectious and inflammatory diseases: prevention and treatment.Signal transduction and targeted therapy · 2024Review
- Rapid, Multispecies Detection of SARS-CoV-2 Antibodies via a Meta-Surface Plasmon Resonance Biosensor.Transboundary and emerging diseases · 2024Article
- Nanotechnology-based approaches in the fight against SARS-CoV-2.AIMS microbiology · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) endgame may benefit from simple, accurate antibody testing to characterize seroprevalence and immunization coverage.
objectivesTo evaluate the performance of the lateral flow QIAreach anti-SARS-CoV-2 Total rapid nanoparticle fluorescence immunoassay compared to reference isotype-specific IgG, IgM, and IgA SARS-CoV-2 ELISA using S1 or receptor binding domain (RBD) as antigens. STUDY
designA diagnostic comparison study was carried out using 154 well-characterized heparin plasma samples. Agreement between assays was assessed by overall, positive, and negative percent agreement and Cohen's kappa coefficient.
resultsOverall agreement between the QIAreach anti-SARS-CoV-2 Total and any anti-spike domain (S1 or RBD) antibody isotype was 96.0 % (95 % CI 89.8-98.8), the positive percent agreement was 97.6 % (95 % CI 91.0-99.9), the negative percent agreement was 88.2 % (95 % CI 64.4-98.0). The kappa coefficient was 0.86 (95 % CI 0.72 to 0.99).
conclusionThe QIAreach anti-SARS-CoV-2 Total rapid antibody test provides comparable performance to high-complexity, laboratory-based ELISA.
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.