Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Cross-sectional IgM and IgG profiles in SARS-CoV-2 infection.
Ozturk, Tugba; Howell, J Christina; Benameur, Karima; Ramonell, Richard; Cashman, Kevin S; Pirmohammed, Shama; Bassit, Leda C; Roback, John D; Marconi, Vincent C; Schinazi, Raymond F; Wharton, Whitney; Lee, F Eun-Hyung; Hu, William T.
  • Ozturk T; Department of Neurology.
  • Howell JC; Department of Neurology.
  • Benameur K; Department of Neurology.
  • Ramonell R; Department of Medicine - Division of Pulmonary, Allergy, Critical Care, and Sleep Medicine.
  • Cashman KS; Department of Medicine-Rheumatology.
  • Pirmohammed S; Department of Neurology.
  • Bassit LC; Department of Pediatrics and Center for AIDS Research.
  • Roback JD; Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology.
  • Marconi VC; Department of Medicine - Division of Infectious Diseases, Emory University School of Medicine.
  • Schinazi RF; Department of Pediatrics and Center for AIDS Research.
  • Wharton W; Emory University Nell Hodgson Woodruff School of Nursing, Atlanta, GA.
  • Lee FE; Department of Medicine - Division of Pulmonary, Allergy, Critical Care, and Sleep Medicine.
  • Hu WT; Department of Neurology.
medRxiv ; 2020 May 14.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32511499
ABSTRACT

Background:

Accurate serological assays can improve the early diagnosis of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection, but few studies have compared performance characteristics between assays in symptomatic and recovered patients.

Methods:

We recruited 32 patients who had 2019 coronavirus disease (COVID-19; 18 hospitalized and actively symptomatic, 14 recovered mild cases), and measured levels of IgM (against the full-length S1 or the highly homologous SARS-CoV E protein) and IgG (against S1 receptor binding domain [RBD]). We performed the same analysis in 103 pre-2020 healthy adult control (HC) participants and 13 participants who had negative molecular testing for SARS-CoV-2.

Results:

Anti-S1-RBD IgG levels were very elevated within days of symptom onset for hospitalized patients (median 2.04 optical density [OD], vs. 0.12 in HC). People who recovered from milder COVID-19 only reached similar IgG levels 28 days after symptom onset. IgM levels were elevated early in both groups (median 1.91 and 2.12 vs. 1.14 OD in HC for anti-S1 IgM, 2.23 and 2.26 vs 1.52 in HC for anti-E IgM), with downward trends in hospitalized cases having longer disease duration. The combination of the two IgM levels showed similar sensitivity for COVID-19 as IgG but greater specificity, and identified 4/10 people (vs. 3/10 by IgG) with prior symptoms and negative molecular testing to have had COVID-19.

Conclusions:

Disease severity and timing both influence levels of IgM and IgG against SARS-CoV-2, with IgG better for early detection of severe cases but IgM more suited for early detection of milder cases.

Texto completo: 1 Banco de datos: MEDLINE Tipo de estudio: Prevalence_studies / Prognostic_studies / Screening_studies Idioma: En Año: 2020 Tipo del documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Banco de datos: MEDLINE Tipo de estudio: Prevalence_studies / Prognostic_studies / Screening_studies Idioma: En Año: 2020 Tipo del documento: Article