Publications

BibTex format

@unpublished{Atchison:2022:10.1101/2022.06.08.22276154,
author = {Atchison, C and Moshe, M and Brown, J and Whitaker, M and Wong, N and Bharath, A and McKendry, R and Darzi, A and Ashby, D and Donnelly, C and Riley, S and Elliott, P and Barclay, W and Cooke, G and Ward, H},
doi = {10.1101/2022.06.08.22276154},
publisher = {medRxiv},
title = {Validity of self-testing at home with rapid SARS-CoV-2 antibody detection by lateral flow immunoassay},
url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1101/2022.06.08.22276154},
year = {2022}
}

Download

RIS format (EndNote, RefMan)

TY  - UNPB
AB  - <h4>ABSTRACT</h4> <h4>Background</h4> Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) antibody lateral flow immunoassays (LFIA) can be carried out in the home and have been used as an affordable and practical approach to large-scale antibody prevalence studies. However, assay performance differs from that of high-throughput laboratory-based assays which can be highly sensitive. We explore LFIA performance under field conditions compared to laboratory-based ELISA and assess the potential of LFIAs to identify people who lack functional antibodies following infection or vaccination. <h4>Methods</h4> Field evaluation of a self-administered LFIA test (Fortress, NI) among 3758 participants from the REal-time Assessment of Community Transmission-2 (REACT-2) study in England selected based on vaccination history and previous LFIA result to ensure a range of antibody titres. In July 2021, participants performed, at home, a self-administered LFIA on finger-prick blood, reported and submitted a photograph of the result, and provided a self-collected capillary blood sample (Tasso-SST) for serological assessment of IgG antibodies to the spike protein using the Roche Elecsys® Anti-SARS-CoV-2 assay. We compared the self-administered and reported LFIA result to the quantitative Roche assay and checked the reading of the LFIA result with an automated image analysis (ALFA). In a subsample of 250 participants, we compared the results to live virus neutralisation. <h4>Results</h4> Almost all participants (3593/3758, 95.6%) had been vaccinated or reported prior infection, with most having received one (862, 22.9%) or two (2430, 64.7%) COVID-19 vaccine doses. Overall, 2777/3758 (73.9%) were positive on self-reported LFIA, 2811/3457 (81.3%) positive by LFIA when ALFA-reported, and 3622/3758 (96.4%) positive on Roche anti-S (using the manufacturer reference standard threshold for positivity of 0.8 U ml -1 ). Live virus neutra
AU  - Atchison,C
AU  - Moshe,M
AU  - Brown,J
AU  - Whitaker,M
AU  - Wong,N
AU  - Bharath,A
AU  - McKendry,R
AU  - Darzi,A
AU  - Ashby,D
AU  - Donnelly,C
AU  - Riley,S
AU  - Elliott,P
AU  - Barclay,W
AU  - Cooke,G
AU  - Ward,H
DO  - 10.1101/2022.06.08.22276154
PB  - medRxiv
PY  - 2022///
TI  - Validity of self-testing at home with rapid SARS-CoV-2 antibody detection by lateral flow immunoassay
UR  - http://dx.doi.org/10.1101/2022.06.08.22276154
UR  - https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2022.06.08.22276154v1
UR  - http://hdl.handle.net/10044/1/98655
ER  -

Download

ProfessorHelenWard

Contact

Location

Summary

Citation

BibTex format

RIS format (EndNote, RefMan)