Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39157350›Full record

ArticleHeliyon2024

Validation of a focus reduction neutralization test (FRNT) to rapidly titrate human SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibodies by using the CTL Immunospot S6 universal analyzer.

Ilaria Puglia, Marialuigia Caporale, Claudia Casaccia, Fabrizia Valleriani, Romolo Salini, Shadia Berjaoui, Cristina Marfoglia, Lucilla Ricci, Alessio Lorusso

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Heliyon, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Ilaria PugliaPhD National Programme in One Health Approaches to Infectious Diseases and Life Science Research, Department of Public Health, Experimental and Forensic Medicine, University of Pavia, Pavia, 27100, Italy.
Marialuigia CaporalePhD National Programme in One Health Approaches to Infectious Diseases and Life Science Research, Department of Public Health, Experimental and Forensic Medicine, University of Pavia, Pavia, 27100, Italy.
Claudia CasacciaIstituto Zooprofilattico Sperimentale dell' Abruzzo e Molise, Teramo, Italy.
Fabrizia VallerianiIstituto Zooprofilattico Sperimentale dell' Abruzzo e Molise, Teramo, Italy.
Romolo SaliniIstituto Zooprofilattico Sperimentale dell' Abruzzo e Molise, Teramo, Italy.
Shadia BerjaouiIstituto Zooprofilattico Sperimentale dell' Abruzzo e Molise, Teramo, Italy.
Cristina MarfogliaIstituto Zooprofilattico Sperimentale dell' Abruzzo e Molise, Teramo, Italy.
Lucilla RicciIstituto Zooprofilattico Sperimentale dell' Abruzzo e Molise, Teramo, Italy.
Alessio LorussoIstituto Zooprofilattico Sperimentale dell' Abruzzo e Molise, Teramo, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In this paper we describe the validation of a focus reduction neutralization test (FRNT) to quantitate human SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibodies by using the CTL Immunospot S6 Universal Analyzer. We employed a previously published protocol and compared its performances to a well-established and traditional serum-neutralization assay (SN). To assess diagnostic sensitivity, a total number of 201 human sera positive by SN for SARS-CoV-2 NAbs were processed: 196/201 tested positive by FRNT50 (97.51 %). A diagnostic specificity of 100 % was obtained by evaluating 206 negative serum samples. Repeatability of the test was evaluated by determining the intra and inter-assay coefficient of variation (CV). A standard deviation of 0.83 and a CV of 13 % were evidenced demonstrating an acceptable reproducibility of the assay. Moreover, a Cohen's Kappa of 0.975 was obtained proving an extremely high level of agreement between the FRNT protocol and the SN. Despite an acceptable correlation between methods (p < 0.05), FRNT demonstrated a statistically significant increase in NAbs titres compared to SN as well as higher data variability and asymmetry. These discrepancies could be attributed to FRNT sensitivity or most probably to the subjective interpretation of SN, although this aspect needs to be further investigated with a more representative number of samples. Basing on our results, it is reasonable to replace the SN with the FRNT assay as, with this, fast processing time (less than 2 days) and operator bias-free results registrations are guaranteed.

Indexed as

AntibodiesImmunoassaysNeutralizationSARS-CoV-2Serology

Identifiers

PMID39157350
PMCPMC11327567

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.