Home    中文  
 
  • Search
  • lucene Search
  • Citation
  • Fig/Tab
  • Adv Search
Just Accepted  |  Current Issue  |  Archive  |  Featured Articles  |  Most Read  |  Most Download  |  Most Cited

Chinese Journal of Clinical Laboratory Management(Electronic Edition) ›› 2025, Vol. 13 ›› Issue (03): 135-142. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.2095-5820.2025.03.002

• Experiment Research • Previous Articles    

Evaluation and application of two novel rapid detection methods for anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies

Zhitong Mai1, Qianying Li2, Zhiqi Zeng3, Ruihan Chen1, Jingyi Liang1, Ruifeng Chen1, Wenda Guan2,(), Zifeng Yang2,4,()   

  1. 1 School of Pharmacy, Macau University of Science and Technology, Macau 999078, China
    2 State Key Laboratory of Respiratory Disease, Guangzhou Institute of Respiratory Health, the First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou Guangdong 510182, China
    3 KingMed School of Laboratory Medicine, Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou Guangdong 510182, China
    4 Guangzhou National Laboratory, Guangzhou Guangdong 510700, China
  • Received:2024-05-23 Online:2025-08-28 Published:2025-10-15
  • Contact: Wenda Guan, Zifeng Yang

Abstract:

Objective

To compare the correlation and consistency of fluorescence immunochromatography (FIC) assay and latex immunochromatography (LIC) assay with ELISA, and to evaluate their clinical utility for SARS-CoV-2 antibody monitoring in fully vaccinated populations.

Methods

511 serum and plasma samples were collected from vaccinated subjects recruited by Macao University of Science and Technology Hospital. All samples were tested for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies by ELISA, FIC assay and LIC assay, respectively. Negative-positive compliance rate, positive and negative predictive values, and Cohen's Kappa values for inter-assay agreement were calculated.

Results

The performance test results showed that the FIC minimum detection limit was 50 ng/ml with linear detection range was 50~2000 ng/ml, while LIC minimum detection limit was 200 ng/ml. There were no cross reaction with antibodies produced by other respiratory viral and bacterial infections. For serum samples, overall compliance rate for FIC assay and LIC assay was 88.26% and 90.41%, respectively. The Cohen's Kappa values were 0.766 and 0.809, respectively. Plasma samples exhibited higher compliance rate (90.80% for both methods) with Kappa values of 0.816 and 0.817, respectively, indicating significantly stronger compliance and consistency than serum samples. Longitudinal monitoring of vaccinated populations revealed that antibody positivity increased gradually after the first two doses of vaccination (ELISA: 60.38%, FIC: 54.72%, LIC: 69.81%), but declined by 180 days (ELISA: 43.24%, FIC: 53.15%, LIC: 66.67%), and rebounded post-booster to 98.75% across all assays. The plasma and serum antibody patterns were similar.

Conclusion

FIC assay and LIC assay have good agreement with ELISA in detecting antibody levels to SARS-CoV-2, which can quantify neutralizing and total antibody levels in a timely manner, and are both suitable for monitoring immunization levels in large-scale populations.

Key words: SARS-CoV-2, neutralizing antibodies, fluorescence immunochromatography, latex immunochromatography

京ICP 备07035254号-20
Copyright © Chinese Journal of Clinical Laboratory Management(Electronic Edition), All Rights Reserved.
Tel: 020-81341720 Fax: 020-37103505 E-mail: clinlab@cma.org.cn
Powered by Beijing Magtech Co. Ltd