Development and validation of different indirect ELISAs for MERS-CoV serological testing

用于 MERS-CoV 血清学检测的不同间接 ELISA 的开发和验证

阅读:9
作者:Anwar M Hashem, Sawsan S Al-Amri, Tagreed L Al-Subhi, Loai A Siddiq, Ahmed M Hassan, Maha M Alawi, Rowa Y Alhabbab, Salwa I Hindawi, Osama B Mohammed, Nabil S Amor, Abdulaziz N Alagaili, Ahmed A Mirza, Esam I Azhar

Abstract

Since 2012, MERS-CoV has caused up to 2220 cases and 790 deaths in 27 countries with Saudi Arabia being the most affected country with ~83.1% of the cases and ~38.8% local death rate. Current serological assays such as microneutralization (MN), plaque reduction neutralization, immunofluorescence, protein microarray or pseudoparticle neutralization assays rely on handling of live MERS-CoV in high containment laboratories or need for expensive and special equipment and reagents and highly trained personnel which represent a technical hurdle for most laboratories in resource-limited MERS-CoV endemic countries. Here, we developed, compared and evaluated three different indirect ELISAs based on MERS-CoV nucleocapsid protein (N), spike (S) ectodomain (amino acids 1-1297) and S1 subunit (amino acids 1-725) and compared them with MN assay. The developed ELISAs were evaluated using large number of confirmed seropositive (79 samples) and seronegative (274 samples) MERS-CoV human serum samples. Both rS1- and rS-ELISAs maintained high sensitivity and specificity (≥90%) across a wider range of OD values compared to rN-ELISA. Moreover, rS1- and rS-based ELISAs showed better agreement and correlation with MN assay in contrast to rN-ELISA. Collectively, our data demonstrate that rS1-ELISA and rS-ELISA are more reliable than rN-ELISA and represent a suitable choice for seroepidemiological testing and surveillance in MERS-CoV endemic regions.

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。