Evaluation of serological lateral flow assays for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2
Bianca A Trombetta,
Savannah E. Kandigian,
Robert R. Kitchen,
Pia Kivisäkk Webb,
Glenn A. Miller,
Charles G. Jennings,
Daimon P Simmons,
Christopher E. Ramirez,
Esmarline J. De León Peralta,
Q. Rushdy Ahmad,
James A. Toombs,
Nell Meosky Luo,
Unnati M. Pandya,
Pushpamali De Silva,
Shibani S Mukerji,
David R. Walt,
Becky C Carlyle,
Lauren L. Ritterhouse,
Posted 04 Jan 2021
medRxiv DOI: 10.1101/2021.01.02.20248998
Posted 04 Jan 2021
BackgroundCOVID-19 has resulted in significant morbidity and mortality worldwide. Lateral flow assays can detect anti-Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) antibodies to monitor transmission. However, standardized evaluation of their accuracy and tools to aid in interpreting results are needed. MethodsWe evaluated 20 IgG and IgM assays selected from available tests in April 2020. We evaluated the assays performance using 56 pre-pandemic negative and 56 SARS-CoV-2-positive plasma samples, collected 10-40 days after symptom onset, confirmed by a molecular test and analyzed by an ultra-sensitive immunoassay. Finally, we developed a user-friendly web app to extrapolate the positive predictive values based on their accuracy and local prevalence. ResultsCombined IgG+IgM sensitivities ranged from 33.9% to 94.6%, while combined specificities ranged from 92.6% to 100%. The highest sensitivities were detected in Lumiquick for IgG (98.2%), BioHit for both IgM (96.4%), and combined IgG+IgM sensitivity (94.6%). Furthermore, 11 LFAs and 8 LFAs showed perfect specificity for IgG and IgM, respectively, with 15 LFAs showing perfect combined IgG+IgM specificity. Lumiquick had the lowest estimated limit-of-detection (LOD) (0.1 g/mL), followed by a similar LOD of 1.5 g/mL for CareHealth, Cellex, KHB, and Vivachek. ConclusionWe provide a public resource of the accuracy of select lateral flow assays with potential for home testing. The cost-effectiveness, scalable manufacturing process, and suitability for self-testing makes LFAs an attractive option for monitoring disease prevalence and assessing vaccine responsiveness. Our web tool provides an easy-to-use interface to demonstrate the impact of prevalence and test accuracy on the positive predictive values.
- Downloaded 448 times
- Download rankings, all-time:
- Site-wide: 85,752
- In infectious diseases: 4,516
- Year to date:
- Site-wide: 52,780
- Since beginning of last month:
- Site-wide: 46,251
Downloads over time
Distribution of downloads per paper, site-wide
- 27 Nov 2020: The website and API now include results pulled from medRxiv as well as bioRxiv.
- 18 Dec 2019: We're pleased to announce PanLingua, a new tool that enables you to search for machine-translated bioRxiv preprints using more than 100 different languages.
- 21 May 2019: PLOS Biology has published a community page about Rxivist.org and its design.
- 10 May 2019: The paper analyzing the Rxivist dataset has been published at eLife.
- 1 Mar 2019: We now have summary statistics about bioRxiv downloads and submissions.
- 8 Feb 2019: Data from Altmetric is now available on the Rxivist details page for every preprint. Look for the "donut" under the download metrics.
- 30 Jan 2019: preLights has featured the Rxivist preprint and written about our findings.
- 22 Jan 2019: Nature just published an article about Rxivist and our data.
- 13 Jan 2019: The Rxivist preprint is live!