Preliminary analysis on serological test results of cases with coronavirus disease 2019
HUANG Yi-wei1, PAN Jia2, WANG Juan1, DAI Zhi-hui1, LI Fang-cai1, HE Zi-xiang1, HU Shi-xiong1, ZHAN Zhi-fei1
1. Hunan Provincial Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Changsha, Hunan 410005, China; 2. The First Hospital of Changsha City, Changsha, Hunan 410005, China
Abstract：Objective To study the serum 2019-new coronavirus (2019-nCoV) immunoglobulin M (IgM) andimmunoglobulin G (IgG) antibodies in the confirmed cases of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), asymptomatic carriers, close contacts and other related personnel. Methods Whole-blood specimens of the surveyed subjects were collected, and the serum was separated in time. Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) and colloidal gold immunochromatographic assay (GICA) were used to detect IgM and IgG antibodies in the sera of the confirmed cases and asymptomatic carriers, while ELISA was employed to detect IgM and IgG antibodies in the sera of close contacts and other related personnel. Results The positive results of 42 confirmed cases detected by ELISA and GICA were as follows: the positive rates of IgM and IgG both showed an increase from the second week of the sampling, and the positive rates were found to be the highest in the group of the 15th-35th days. The positive rates of IgM antibody detected by ELISA and GICA were 72.7% and 36.4%, respectively. The positive rates of IgG antibody detected by ELISA and GICA were 72.7% and 90.9%, respectively. Among 8 asymptomatic carriers detected by ELISA, 5 (62.5%) cases were IgM positive and 5 (62.5%) cases IgG positive. 1 (1.7%) close contact was IgM positive and 2 (3.4%) close contacts IgG positive. As for other related personnel, 1(2.0%) case was IgM positive and 2 (4.1%) cases IgG positive. The median interval from the onset of illness to the sampling date in confirmed cases detected by ELISA for IgM, GICA for IgM, ELISA for IgG and GICA for IgG were 16, 14, 12 and 13 days, respectively. The results detected by ELISA and GICA were compared, and the Kappa values of IgM and IgG antibodies detection were 0.614 and 0.716, respectively. Conclusions The positive rates of serological tests of the confirmed COVID-19 cases presented a significant increase from the second week of the sampling, and the positive rates of different types of people showed statistically significant differences. The consistency of ELISA and GICA for 2019-nCoV IgM and IgG antibodies was medium-high.
黄一伟, 潘佳, 王娟, 戴志辉, 李芳彩, 贺子翔, 胡世雄, 湛志飞. 新型冠状病毒肺炎病例的血清学检测结果初步分析[J]. 实用预防医学, 2020, 27(9): 1025-1027.
HUANG Yi-wei, PAN Jia, WANG Juan, DAI Zhi-hui, LI Fang-cai, HE Zi-xiang, HU Shi-xiong, ZHAN Zhi-fei. Preliminary analysis on serological test results of cases with coronavirus disease 2019. , 2020, 27(9): 1025-1027.
[1] Li Q, Guan X, Wu P, et al. Early transmission dynamics in Wuhan, China, of novel coronavirus–infected pneumonia[J]. N Engl J Med, 2020,382(13):1199-1207. [2] Zhu N, Zhang D, Wang W, et al. A novel coronavirus from patients with pneumonia in China, 2019[J]. N Engl J Med, 2020, 382 (8) :727-733. [3] 国家卫生健康委员会,国家中医药管理局.新型冠状病毒肺炎诊疗方案(试行第七版)[Z]. 2020-03-04. [4] 国家卫生健康委员会,国家中医药管理局.新型冠状病毒肺炎诊疗方案(试行第六版)[Z]. 2020-02-18. [5] 国家卫生健康委员会.新型冠状病毒实验室生物安全指南(第二版)[Z].2020-01-23. [6] 徐万洲,李娟,何晓云,等. 血清2019新型冠状病毒IgM和IgG抗体联合检测在新型冠状病毒感染中的诊断价值 [J] . 中华检验医学杂志,2020,43(3):230-233. [7] 张茜,冯振卿.新型冠状病毒肺炎的抗体应对策略[J] .南京医科大学学报(自然科学版),2020,40(2):155-159. [8] 李芳彩,戴志辉,贺子翔,等. ELISA法与胶体金法在检测新型冠状病毒血清抗体中的应用探讨[J].实用预防医学,2020,27(7):780-783.
2020, Vol. 27 
