Evaluation of rapid antibody test and chest computed tomography results of COVID‐19 patients: A retrospective study

  1. Ali Ozturk
  2. Taylan Bozok
  3. Tugce Simsek Bozok

Reviewed by

Read the full article See related articles

Discuss this preprint

Start a discussion What are Sciety discussions?

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the SARS‐CoV‐2 immunoglobulin M/immunoglobulin G (IgM/IgG) rapid antibody test results in symptomatic patients with COVID‐19 and their chest computed tomography (CT) data. A total of 320 patients admitted to our hospital for different durations due to COVID‐19 were included in the study. Serum samples were obtained within 0–7 days from COVID‐19 patients confirmed by reverse‐transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT‐PCR) and chest CT scan. According to the SARS‐CoV‐2 RT‐PCR results, the patients included in the study were divided into two groups: PCR positive group ( n  = 46) and PCR negative group ( n  = 274). The relationship between chest CT and rapid antibody test results were compared statistically. Of the 320 COVID‐19 serum samples, IgM, IgG, and IgM/IgG were detected in 8.4%, 0.3%, and 11.6% within 1 week, respectively. IgG/IgM antibodies were not detected in 79.7% of the patients. In the study, 249 (77.8%) of 320 patients had positive chest CT scans. Four (5.6%) of 71 patients with negative chest CT scans had IgM and two (2.8%) were both IgM/IgG positive. IgM was detected in 23 (9.2%), IgG in one (0.4%), and IgM/IgG in 35 (14%) of chest CT scan positive patients. The rate of CT findings in patients with antibody positivity was found to be significantly higher than those with antibody negativity. The results of the present study show the accurate and equivalent performance of serological antibody assays and chest CT in detecting SARS‐CoV‐2 within 0–7 days from the onset of COVID19 symptoms. When RT‐PCR is not available, we believe that the combination of immunochromatographic test and chest CT scan can increase diagnostic sensitivity for COVID‐19.

Article activity feed

  1. Version published to 10.1002/jmv.27209
  2. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2021.02.15.21251772: (What is this?)

    Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.

    Table 1: Rigor

    Institutional Review Board StatementIRB: Ethical approval: This study was reviewed and approved by the Ethics Committee of Nigde Omer Halisdemir University Faculty of Medicine (Approval no. 2020/21).
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    Antibodies
    SentencesResources
    Detection of SARS-CoV-2 IgM / IgG antibodies: Qualitative detection of antibodies was performed using the COVID-19 IgM / IgG rapid test kit developed for SARS-CoV-2 (colloidal gold) based on the Lateral flow method (Singclean®, China) according to the manufacturer’s instructions.
    SARS-CoV-2 IgM / IgG
    suggested: None
    COVID-19 IgM / IgG
    suggested: None
    Software and Algorithms
    SentencesResources
    Statistical analysis: SPSS 20.0 was used for statistical analysis.
    SPSS
    suggested: (SPSS, RRID:SCR_002865)

    Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).

    Results from LimitationRecognizer: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:
    Our study has some limitations; only symptomatic patients were included in the study. Therefore, it is not known whether the antibody response is similar in asymptomatic individuals. Serum samples collected for antibody testing and chest CT scan data were obtained within one week from the onset of symptoms. Therefore, it is necessary to take samples/scans at different times to obtain clear information about the sensitivity of these tests. Besides, more detailed studies with different methods (such as ELISA) on consecutive samples are needed. Multi-center studies should be conducted to determine the usefulness of both tests for the diagnosis of COVID-19.

    Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.

    Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.

    Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.

    Results from rtransparent:
    • Thank you for including a conflict of interest statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • Thank you for including a funding statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • No protocol registration statement was detected.

    About SciScore

    SciScore is an automated tool that is designed to assist expert reviewers by finding and presenting formulaic information scattered throughout a paper in a standard, easy to digest format. SciScore checks for the presence and correctness of RRIDs (research resource identifiers), and for rigor criteria such as sex and investigator blinding. For details on the theoretical underpinning of rigor criteria and the tools shown here, including references cited, please follow this link.

  3. Version published to 10.1101/2021.02.15.21251772 on medRxiv