Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Clinical Trial
. 2020 Oct;34(10):13877-13884.
doi: 10.1096/fj.202001700RR. Epub 2020 Aug 28.

Clinical sensitivity and interpretation of PCR and serological COVID-19 diagnostics for patients presenting to the hospital

Tyler E Miller  1 , Wilfredo F Garcia Beltran  1 , Adam Z Bard  1 , Tasos Gogakos  1 , Melis N Anahtar  1 , Michael Gerino Astudillo  1 , Diane Yang  1 , Julia Thierauf  1 , Adam S Fisch  1 , Grace K Mahowald  1 , Megan J Fitzpatrick  1 , Valentina Nardi  1 , Jared Feldman  2 , Blake M Hauser  2 , Timothy M Caradonna  2 , Hetal D Marble  1 , Lauren L Ritterhouse  1 , Sara E Turbett  1   3 , Julie Batten  1 , Nicholas Zeke Georgantas  1 , Galit Alter  2 , Aaron G Schmidt  2 , Jason B Harris  4 , Jeffrey A Gelfand  3 , Mark C Poznansky  3 , Bradley E Bernstein  1 , David N Louis  1 , Anand Dighe  1 , Richelle C Charles  3 , Edward T Ryan  3 , John A Branda  1 , Virginia M Pierce  1   4 , Mandakolathur R Murali  1   5 , A John Iafrate  1 , Eric S Rosenberg  1   3 , Jochen K Lennerz  1
Affiliations
Clinical Trial

Clinical sensitivity and interpretation of PCR and serological COVID-19 diagnostics for patients presenting to the hospital

Tyler E Miller et al. FASEB J. 2020 Oct.

Abstract

The diagnosis of COVID-19 requires integration of clinical and laboratory data. Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) diagnostic assays play a central role in diagnosis and have fixed technical performance metrics. Interpretation becomes challenging because the clinical sensitivity changes as the virus clears and the immune response emerges. Our goal was to examine the clinical sensitivity of two most common SARS-CoV-2 diagnostic test modalities, polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and serology, over the disease course to provide insight into their clinical interpretation in patients presenting to the hospital. We conducted a single-center, retrospective study. To derive clinical sensitivity of PCR, we identified 209 PCR-positive SARS-CoV-2 patients with multiple PCR test results (624 total PCR tests) and calculated daily sensitivity from date of symptom onset or first positive test. Clinical sensitivity of PCR decreased with days post symptom onset with >90% clinical sensitivity during the first 5 days after symptom onset, 70%-71% from Days 9 to 11, and 30% at Day 21. To calculate daily clinical sensitivity by serology, we utilized 157 PCR-positive patients with a total of 197 specimens tested by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay for IgM, IgG, and IgA anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. In contrast to PCR, serological sensitivity increased with days post symptom onset with >50% of patients seropositive by at least one antibody isotype after Day 7, >80% after Day 12, and 100% by Day 21. Taken together, PCR and serology are complimentary modalities that require time-dependent interpretation. Superimposition of sensitivities over time indicate that serology can function as a reliable diagnostic aid indicating recent or prior infection.

Keywords: COVID; SARS-CoV-2; biomarker; qPCR.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Dr Gelfand reports personal fees from Henry Schein Inc, outside the submitted work; Dr Turbett reports grants from Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, outside the submitted work; Dr Anahtar reports personal fees and other from Day Zero Diagnostics, outside the submitted work; Dr Ryan reports grants from CDC, during the conduct of the study. Dr. Branda reports grants from Zeus Scientific, grants from bioMerieux, grants from Immunetics, personal fees from T2 Biosystems, personal fees from DiaSorin, personal fees from Roche Diagnostics, grants from Bay Area Lyme Foundation, grants from Lyme Disease Biobank Foundation, outside the submitted work.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Sensitivity by assay modality over time. Blood‐based serologic sensitivity in 157 patients superimposed onto NP swab PCR data from 209 patients. Results for all patient samples from initial symptom onset are plotted: PCR—516, Serology—588 (196 samples × 3 isotypes). Serology sensitivity is based on detection of IgM, IgG, or IgA. Sample results prior to Day 0 were excluded. PCR and serology samples were obtained in largely different patient populations; therefore, sensitivities are not additive. Data is plotted as 5‐day moving average against the days since symptom onset. NA, none assessed
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Cheng MP, Papenburg J, Desjardins M, et al. Diagnostic testing for severe acute respiratory syndrome‐related coronavirus 2: a narrative review. Ann Intern Med. 2020;172(11):726‐734. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Guo L, Ren L, Yang S, et al. Profiling early humoral response to diagnose novel coronavirus disease (COVID‐19). Clin Infect Dis. 2020;71(15):778‐785. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Sethuraman N, Jeremiah SS, Ryo A. Interpreting diagnostic tests for SARS‐CoV‐2. JAMA. 2020;323(22):2249. - PubMed
    1. Wolfel R, Corman VM, Guggemos W, et al. Virological assessment of hospitalized patients with COVID‐2019. Nature. 2020;581(7809):465‐469. - PubMed
    1. He X, Lau EHY, Wu P, et al. Temporal dynamics in viral shedding and transmissibility of COVID‐19. Nat Med. 2020;26(5):672‐675. - PubMed

Publication types

Substances