Development and multicenter performance evaluation of fully automated SARS-CoV-2 IgM and IgG immunoassays
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives: The outbreak of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has rapidly spread globally. The laboratory diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection has relied on nucleic acid testing; however, it has some limitations, such as low throughput and high rates of false negatives. Tests of higher sensitivity are needed to effectively identify infected patients. Methods: This study has developed fully automated chemiluminescent immunoassays to determine IgM and IgG antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 in human serum. The assay performance has been evaluated at 10 hospitals. Clinical specificity was evaluated by measuring 972 hospitalized patients and 586 donors of a normal population. Clinical sensitivity was assessed on 513 confirmed cases of SARS-CoV-2 by RT-PCR. Results: The assays demonstrated satisfied assay precision with coefficient of variation of less than 4.45%. Inactivation of specimen did not affect assay measurement. SARS-CoV-2 IgM showed clinical specificity of 97.33 and 99.49% for hospitalized patients and the normal population respectively, and SARS-CoV-2 IgG showed clinical specificity of 97.43 and 99.15% respectively. SARS-CoV-2 IgM showed clinical sensitivity of 82.54, 92.93, and 84.62% before 7 days, 7-14 days, and after 14 days respectively, since onset of symptoms, and SARS-CoV-2 IgG showed clinical sensitivity of 80.95, 97.98, and 99.15% respectively at the same time points above. Conclusions: We have developed fully automated immunoassays for detecting SARS-CoV-2 IgM and IgG antibodies in human serum. The assays demonstrated high clinical specificity and sensitivity, and add great value to nucleic acid testing in fighting against the global pandemic of the SARS-CoV-2 infection.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.014 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".