Scoping review of the applications of peptide microarrays on the fight against human infections.

INTRODUCTION: This scoping review explores the use of peptide microarrays in the fight against infectious diseases. The research domains explored included the use of peptide microarrays in the mapping of linear B-cell and T cell epitopes, antimicrobial peptide discovery, immunosignature characterisation and disease immunodiagnostics. This review also provides a short overview of peptide microarray synthesis. METHODS: Electronic databases were systematically searched to identify relevant studies. The review was conducted using the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology for scoping reviews and data charting was performed using a predefined form. The results were reported by narrative synthesis in line with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews guidelines. RESULTS: Ninety-five articles from 103 studies were included in the final data charting process. The majority (92. 0%) of the articles were published during 2010-2020 and were mostly from Europe (44.2%) and North America (34.7%). The findings were from the investigation of viral (45.6%), bacterial (32. 0%), parasitic (23.3%) and fungal (2. 0%) infections. Out of the serological studies, IgG was the most reported antibody type followed by IgM. The largest portion of the studies (77.7%) were related to mapping B-cell linear epitopes, 5.8% were on diagnostics, 5.8% reported on immunosignature characterisation and 8.7% reported on viral and bacterial cell binding assays. Two studies reported on T-cell epitope profiling. CONCLUSION: The most important application of peptide microarrays was found to be B-cell epitope mapping or antibody profiling to identify diagnostic and vaccine targets. Immunosignatures identified by random peptide microarrays were found to be applied in the diagnosis of infections and interrogation of vaccine responses. The analysis of the interactions of random peptide microarrays with bacterial and viral cells using binding assays enabled the identification of antimicrobial peptides. Peptide microarray arrays were also used for T-cell linear epitope mapping which may provide more information for the design of peptide-based vaccines and for the development of diagnostic reagents.

A systematic and meta-analysis review on the diagnostic accuracy of antibodies in the serological diagnosis of COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Serological testing based on different antibody types are an alternative method being used to diagnose SARS-CoV-2 and has the potential of having higher diagnostic accuracy compared to the current gold standard rRT-PCR. Therefore, the objective of this review was to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of IgG and IgM based point-of-care (POC) lateral flow immunoassay (LFIA), chemiluminescence enzyme immunoassay (CLIA), fluorescence enzyme-linked immunoassay (FIA) and ELISA systems that detect SARS-CoV-2 antigens. METHOD: A systematic literature search was carried out in PubMed, Medline complete and MedRxiv. Studies evaluating the diagnostic accuracy of serological assays for SARS-CoV-2 were eligible. Study selection and data-extraction were performed by two authors independently. QUADAS-2 checklist tool was used to assess the quality of the studies. The bivariate model and the hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic curve model were performed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of the serological tests. Subgroup meta-analysis was performed to explore the heterogeneity. RESULTS: The pooled sensitivity for IgG (n = 17), IgM (n = 16) and IgG-IgM (n = 24) based LFIA tests were 0.5856, 0.4637 and 0.6886, respectively compared to rRT-PCR method. The pooled sensitivity for IgG (n = 9) and IgM (n = 10) based CLIA tests were 0.9311 and 0.8516, respectively compared to rRT-PCR. The pooled sensitivity the IgG (n = 10), IgM (n = 11) and IgG-IgM (n = 5) based ELISA tests were 0.8292, 0.8388 and 0.8531 respectively compared to rRT-PCR. All tests displayed high specificities ranging from 0.9693 to 0.9991. Amongst the evaluated tests, IgG based CLIA expressed the highest sensitivity signifying its accurate detection of the largest proportion of infections identified by rRT-PCR. ELISA and CLIA tests performed better in terms of sensitivity compared to LFIA. IgG based tests performed better compared to IgM except for the ELISA. CONCLUSIONS: We report that IgG-IgM based ELISA tests have the best overall diagnostic test accuracy. Moreover, irrespective of the method, a combined IgG/IgM test seems to be a better choice in terms of sensitivity than measuring either antibody type independently. Given the poor performances of the current LFIA devices, there is a need for more research on the development of highly sensitivity and specific POC LFIA that are adequate for most individual patient applications and attractive for large sero-prevalence studies. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42020179112.