COVIDNCT04360954
Evaluation of Antibody Tests for COVID-19
An observational study of COVID and Coronavirus, run by Washington University School of Medicine at 1 site in United States.
Trial summary
The purpose of this study is to evaluate the sensitivity and specificity of several marketed commercial or prototype test kits for antibody to SARS-CoV-2. The focus will be on rapid-format, point-of-care antibody test kits that detect both IgM and IgG antibodies to recombinant viral proteins. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- COVID, Coronavirus
- What is being tested?
- Diagnostic test
- How many people
- 461 participants
- Where
- 1 siteUnited States
- Study dates
- 23 Apr 2020to 8 Jul 2020
- Phase
- Observational
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 years and older
- All sexes
- Adult, Older adult
Study population: * Sera/plasma from patients in St. Louis, Missouri who have been hospitalized and tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 * Sera/plasma from people in St. Louis, Missouri who have recovered from COVID-19 * Sera/plasma from from healthy humans in the US and from rural areas of low and middle income countries Note: No voluntary enrolment into this study will be conducted; all testing is to be conducted anonymously.
Who may be able to join
- Sera/plasma from patients who have been hospitalized and tested positive for SARS-CoV-2
- Sera/plasma from people who have recovered from COVID-19
- Sera/plasma from from healthy humans and persons with parasitic diseases
Who cannot join
- Persons under the age of 18
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
United States1 site
Washington University School of Medicine
St Louis, Missouri, 63110
About this study
Official title: Evaluation of Commerical Antibody Tests for COVID-19
The purpose of this study is to evaluate the sensitivity and specificity of several marketed commercial or prototype test kits for antibody to SARS-CoV-2. The focus will be on rapid-format, point-of-care antibody test kits that detect both IgM and IgG antibodies to recombinant viral proteins.
Note: No voluntary enrolment into this study will be conducted; all testing is to be conducted anonymously.
Read the detailed description
Background
Molecular (RT-PCR) tests are currently the gold standard for diagnosis of COVID-19. They detect viral RNA and are a good marker for current infection and infectivity. However, these tests are expensive and in short supply. In advanced COVID-19 cases, virus concentration in the upper respiratory tract is often low, as the infection has spread to the lungs and viral RNA is sometimes undetectable by RT-PCR using nasal swaps. Antibody tests detect human antibodies to viral proteins in the blood or other body fluids. They could be useful for diagnosing current infections (slightly less sensitive than RT-PCR tests), and they remain positive after persons have recovered from the infection. Thus, antibody tests are expected to be useful for diagnosis of current infections, for verifying recent infections in persons who were not tested by RT-PCR when they were ill, and for documenting possible immunity to the virus. Antibody tests may be especially valuable for use in low and middle income countries that lack resources for widespread molecular testing for SARS-CoV-2 infection.
Anticipated test sensitivity and specificity. Manufacturer data for several antibody tests claim that more than 90% of persons with COVID-19 (clinical symptoms and positive molecular tests) have positive antibody test results for IgM and/or IgG. They also claim specificity in the range of 93-95% for samples from persons who have not been exposed to SARS-CoV-2.
Availability of antibody tests. In recent months, many antibody tests have been developed and marketed. The Foundation for Innovative New Diagnostics (FIND, closely linked to World Health Organization (WHO) and supported by a large grant from the United Kingdom government) in Geneva Switzerland reported that they had identified more than 70 such tests, and they shortlisted 27 tests for further evaluation. Of these, only one test produced in the USA (produced by Cellex) has received an emergency use authorization (EUA) from the US FDA, and no test has formal FDA approval. Antibody tests use different diagnostic platforms, but most tests use the SARS-CoV-2 S1protein, and a few tests also use the SARS-CoV-2 N protein. Few studies that independently evaluated the performance of these rapid antibody tests have been published to date in peer-reviewed journals. Therefore, more data are needed to evaluate the sensitivity, specificity, and value of these tests.
Methods
The Weil Lab research group at Washington University School of Medicine (WUSM) has extensive experience developing and evaluating rapid format diagnostic tests for infectious diseases. The group has special interest in infectious disease diagnostics that can be used in low and middle income countries and is used to work under challenging conditions after disease outbreaks. In this project, rapid-format antibody tests for SARS-CoV-2 will be evaluated and antibody test results will be compared with results of RT-PCR and metadata (age, gender, clinical symptoms, time after exposure when known).
Patient samples. Deidentified serum or plasma samples will be tested from patients who have been hospitalized and tested positive for COVID-19. Control samples from our serum bank (deidentified samples from healthy humans and samples from persons with parasitic diseases) will also be tested. The number of serum or plasma samples to be tested will be left open, but this will depend in part on the number of samples available and the availability of test kits. It is anticipated that approximately 500 samples will be tested initially, but more may be tested if that is necessary to achieve study objectives. The tests and research are for research only, and we will not report test results from individual patient samples to clinicians to support patient care.
Note: No voluntary enrolment into this study will be conducted; all testing is to be conducted anonymously.
Antibody test kits. Marketed commercial or prototype antibody detection kits will be obtained by donation or purchase. Tests to be evaluated are to be determined, but this will depend on availability and cost. The focus will be on rapid-format, point-of-care antibody test kits that detect both IgM and IgG antibodies to recombinant viral proteins. The goal is to test at least five (5) different kits including at least two (2) that are manufactured in the USA.
Test procedures. Manufacturers' package inserts or protocols for test performance will be followed. These vary across different test platforms. Persons who perform the tests will not know PCR results or other metadata associated with the human samples when they perform the tests. Tests will be read by two independent readers and recorded. A third reader will be the deciding vote for cases with discordant readings.
Test data. Antibody test results (IgM and IgG) for each different test kit will be entered into a test result form with the participant's unique identifier number (UI). Results will later be merged into a database that contains the UI and metadata such as age, sex, fever, cough, date sample was collected, date of symptom onset, exposure history (travel, household, work). Acceptability of test performance will be judged according to a working target product profile (TPP) appended at the end of this protocol.
Primary objective
- To assess the sensitivity and specificity of tests for antibody to SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19 disease. Separate criteria will be used to define sensitivity for acute and convalescent samples.
- Sensitivity for diagnosis of acute cases will be defined as % positivity in samples from symptomatic cases with positive RT-PCR results. .
- Sensitivity for detecting antibody in convalescent samples expressed as % will be the number of positive antibody tests divided by the number of samples tested from persons with documented past infections (by RT-PCR) who are now at least 2 weeks past resolution of symptoms and currently RT-PCR negative.
- Sensitivity will also be defined as % agreement with results from a reference antibody test as soon as one is identified.
- Specificity will be defined as the % of negative control samples (collected prior to 1/1/2020) that have negative antibody test results.
Secondary Objectives
- To determine relationships between the time after infection or onset of symptoms of COVID-19 and the presence of antibodies to the virus as determined by antibody test kits.
- To determine the duration of antibody responses following infection.
- To compare background reactivity (false positive rates) for sera from the USA vs. sera from developing countries in areas where chronic parasitic infections and consumption of bushmeat are common or where people live in close relationship with wildlife that may be a reservoir for zoonotic viruses.
- To assess test performance characteristics (ease of use).
Benefits to participants. None
Benefits to society. Antibody tests may be useful for diagnosis of infection and for documentation of past infection. Independent test validation studies are critically important. That is because test results from companies may be biased. In addition, companies often do not report on the user friendliness of rapid diagnostics. Antibody tests may be especially valuable for use in low and middle income countries that lack resources for widespread molecular testing for SARS-CoV-2 infection.
- Conditions
- COVID, Coronavirus
- Being tested
- Diagnostic test
- Keywords
- COVID, Coronavirus, Antibody test kit
- Medical subject headings
- Coronavirus Infections
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Diagnostic testDiagnostic test
There is no intervention. This study will test deidentified archived biosamples.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Acute COVID infection | Active infection with positive RT-PCR Receives: Diagnostic Test: Diagnostic test | |
| Convalescent COVID | Recent documented infection. Now asymptomatic and RT-PCR negative. Receives: Diagnostic Test: Diagnostic test | |
| US Controls | Human samples pre-COVID. Receives: Diagnostic Test: Diagnostic test | |
| LMIC Controls | Samples from LMIC pre-COVID. Receives: Diagnostic Test: Diagnostic test |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Test Sensitivity
Test sensitivity relative to RT-PCR for acute samples; sensitivity relative to ELISA for convalescent samples.
Measured: 2020
Test Specificity
Percent positivity with pre-COVID samples
Measured: 2020
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted24 Apr 2020
- Study start23 Apr 2020
- Primary completion8 Jul 2020
- Study completion8 Jul 2020
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (8)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for COVIDStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by Washington University School of MedicineThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Observational
- Observational model
- Case only
- Time perspective
- Retrospective
- Enrolment
- 461 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Washington University School of Medicine
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT04360954
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 202004088
- Status last verified
- Jun 2024
- First submitted
- 20 Apr 2020
- Last updated
- 4 Jun 2024
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
Publications
Bogus J, Gankpala L, Fischer K, Krentel A, Weil GJ, Fischer PU, Kollie K, Bolay FK. Community Attitudes Toward Mass Drug Administration for Control and Elimination of Neglected Tropical Diseases After the 2014 Outbreak of Ebola Virus Disease in Lofa County, Liberia. Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2016 Mar;94(3):497-503. doi: 10.4269/ajtmh.15-0591. Epub 2015 Dec 14.
PubMed 26666700Chesnais CB, Awaca-Uvon NP, Bolay FK, Boussinesq M, Fischer PU, Gankpala L, Meite A, Missamou F, Pion SD, Weil GJ. A multi-center field study of two point-of-care tests for circulating Wuchereria bancrofti antigenemia in Africa. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2017 Sep 11;11(9):e0005703. doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0005703. eCollection 2017 Sep.
PubMed 28892473Corman VM, Landt O, Kaiser M, Molenkamp R, Meijer A, Chu DK, Bleicker T, Brunink S, Schneider J, Schmidt ML, Mulders DG, Haagmans BL, van der Veer B, van den Brink S, Wijsman L, Goderski G, Romette JL, Ellis J, Zambon M, Peiris M, Goossens H, Reusken C, Koopmans MP, Drosten C. Detection of 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) by real-time RT-PCR. Euro Surveill. 2020 Jan;25(3):2000045. doi: 10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2020.25.3.2000045.
PubMed 31992387Li Z, Yi Y, Luo X, Xiong N, Liu Y, Li S, Sun R, Wang Y, Hu B, Chen W, Zhang Y, Wang J, Huang B, Lin Y, Yang J, Cai W, Wang X, Cheng J, Chen Z, Sun K, Pan W, Zhan Z, Chen L, Ye F. Development and clinical application of a rapid IgM-IgG combined antibody test for SARS-CoV-2 infection diagnosis. J Med Virol. 2020 Sep;92(9):1518-1524. doi: 10.1002/jmv.25727. Epub 2020 Apr 13.
PubMed 32104917Okba NMA, Muller MA, Li W, Wang C, GeurtsvanKessel CH, Corman VM, Lamers MM, Sikkema RS, de Bruin E, Chandler FD, Yazdanpanah Y, Le Hingrat Q, Descamps D, Houhou-Fidouh N, Reusken CBEM, Bosch BJ, Drosten C, Koopmans MPG, Haagmans BL. Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2-Specific Antibody Responses in Coronavirus Disease Patients. Emerg Infect Dis. 2020 Jul;26(7):1478-1488. doi: 10.3201/eid2607.200841. Epub 2020 Jun 21.
PubMed 32267220Tang YW, Schmitz JE, Persing DH, Stratton CW. Laboratory Diagnosis of COVID-19: Current Issues and Challenges. J Clin Microbiol. 2020 May 26;58(6):e00512-20. doi: 10.1128/JCM.00512-20. Print 2020 May 26.
PubMed 32245835Weil GJ, Curtis KC, Fakoli L, Fischer K, Gankpala L, Lammie PJ, Majewski AC, Pelletreau S, Won KY, Bolay FK, Fischer PU. Laboratory and field evaluation of a new rapid test for detecting Wuchereria bancrofti antigen in human blood. Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2013 Jul;89(1):11-15. doi: 10.4269/ajtmh.13-0089. Epub 2013 May 20.
PubMed 23690552Weil GJ, Lammie PJ, Weiss N. The ICT Filariasis Test: A rapid-format antigen test for diagnosis of bancroftian filariasis. Parasitol Today. 1997 Oct;13(10):401-4. doi: 10.1016/s0169-4758(97)01130-7.
PubMed 15275155
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 4 Jun 2024. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Evaluation of Commerical Antibody Tests for COVID-19
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT04360954
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- 202004088
- Conditions
- COVID, Coronavirus
- Keywords
- COVID, Coronavirus, Antibody test kit
- Study type
- Observational
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 461 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Washington University School of MedicineUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 23 Apr 2020 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 8 Jul 2020 (actual)
- Study completion
- 8 Jul 2020 (actual)
- First posted
- 24 Apr 2020 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
The purpose of this study is to evaluate the sensitivity and specificity of several marketed commercial or prototype test kits for antibody to SARS-CoV-2. The focus will be on rapid-format, point-of-care antibody test kits that detect both IgM and IgG antibodies to recombinant viral proteins.
Note: No voluntary enrolment into this study will be conducted; all testing is to be conducted anonymously.
Detailed description
Background
Molecular (RT-PCR) tests are currently the gold standard for diagnosis of COVID-19. They detect viral RNA and are a good marker for current infection and infectivity. However, these tests are expensive and in short supply. In advanced COVID-19 cases, virus concentration in the upper respiratory tract is often low, as the infection has spread to the lungs and viral RNA is sometimes undetectable by RT-PCR using nasal swaps. Antibody tests detect human antibodies to viral proteins in the blood or other body fluids. They could be useful for diagnosing current infections (slightly less sensitive than RT-PCR tests), and they remain positive after persons have recovered from the infection. Thus, antibody tests are expected to be useful for diagnosis of current infections, for verifying recent infections in persons who were not tested by RT-PCR when they were ill, and for documenting possible immunity to the virus. Antibody tests may be especially valuable for use in low and middle income countries that lack resources for widespread molecular testing for SARS-CoV-2 infection.
Anticipated test sensitivity and specificity. Manufacturer data for several antibody tests claim that more than 90% of persons with COVID-19 (clinical symptoms and positive molecular tests) have positive antibody test results for IgM and/or IgG. They also claim specificity in the range of 93-95% for samples from persons who have not been exposed to SARS-CoV-2.
Availability of antibody tests. In recent months, many antibody tests have been developed and marketed. The Foundation for Innovative New Diagnostics (FIND, closely linked to World Health Organization (WHO) and supported by a large grant from the United Kingdom government) in Geneva Switzerland reported that they had identified more than 70 such tests, and they shortlisted 27 tests for further evaluation. Of these, only one test produced in the USA (produced by Cellex) has received an emergency use authorization (EUA) from the US FDA, and no test has formal FDA approval. Antibody tests use different diagnostic platforms, but most tests use the SARS-CoV-2 S1protein, and a few tests also use the SARS-CoV-2 N protein. Few studies that independently evaluated the performance of these rapid antibody tests have been published to date in peer-reviewed journals. Therefore, more data are needed to evaluate the sensitivity, specificity, and value of these tests.
Methods
The Weil Lab research group at Washington University School of Medicine (WUSM) has extensive experience developing and evaluating rapid format diagnostic tests for infectious diseases. The group has special interest in infectious disease diagnostics that can be used in low and middle income countries and is used to work under challenging conditions after disease outbreaks. In this project, rapid-format antibody tests for SARS-CoV-2 will be evaluated and antibody test results will be compared with results of RT-PCR and metadata (age, gender, clinical symptoms, time after exposure when known).
Patient samples. Deidentified serum or plasma samples will be tested from patients who have been hospitalized and tested positive for COVID-19. Control samples from our serum bank (deidentified samples from healthy humans and samples from persons with parasitic diseases) will also be tested. The number of serum or plasma samples to be tested will be left open, but this will depend in part on the number of samples available and the availability of test kits. It is anticipated that approximately 500 samples will be tested initially, but more may be tested if that is necessary to achieve study objectives. The tests and research are for research only, and we will not report test results from individual patient samples to clinicians to support patient care.
Note: No voluntary enrolment into this study will be conducted; all testing is to be conducted anonymously.
Antibody test kits. Marketed commercial or prototype antibody detection kits will be obtained by donation or purchase. Tests to be evaluated are to be determined, but this will depend on availability and cost. The focus will be on rapid-format, point-of-care antibody test kits that detect both IgM and IgG antibodies to recombinant viral proteins. The goal is to test at least five (5) different kits including at least two (2) that are manufactured in the USA.
Test procedures. Manufacturers' package inserts or protocols for test performance will be followed. These vary across different test platforms. Persons who perform the tests will not know PCR results or other metadata associated with the human samples when they perform the tests. Tests will be read by two independent readers and recorded. A third reader will be the deciding vote for cases with discordant readings.
Test data. Antibody test results (IgM and IgG) for each different test kit will be entered into a test result form with the participant's unique identifier number (UI). Results will later be merged into a database that contains the UI and metadata such as age, sex, fever, cough, date sample was collected, date of symptom onset, exposure history (travel, household, work). Acceptability of test performance will be judged according to a working target product profile (TPP) appended at the end of this protocol.
Primary objective
- To assess the sensitivity and specificity of tests for antibody to SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19 disease. Separate criteria will be used to define sensitivity for acute and convalescent samples.
- Sensitivity for diagnosis of acute cases will be defined as % positivity in samples from symptomatic cases with positive RT-PCR results. .
- Sensitivity for detecting antibody in convalescent samples expressed as % will be the number of positive antibody tests divided by the number of samples tested from persons with documented past infections (by RT-PCR) who are now at least 2 weeks past resolution of symptoms and currently RT-PCR negative.
- Sensitivity will also be defined as % agreement with results from a reference antibody test as soon as one is identified.
- Specificity will be defined as the % of negative control samples (collected prior to 1/1/2020) that have negative antibody test results.
Secondary Objectives
- To determine relationships between the time after infection or onset of symptoms of COVID-19 and the presence of antibodies to the virus as determined by antibody test kits.
- To determine the duration of antibody responses following infection.
- To compare background reactivity (false positive rates) for sera from the USA vs. sera from developing countries in areas where chronic parasitic infections and consumption of bushmeat are common or where people live in close relationship with wildlife that may be a reservoir for zoonotic viruses.
- To assess test performance characteristics (ease of use).
Benefits to participants. None
Benefits to society. Antibody tests may be useful for diagnosis of infection and for documentation of past infection. Independent test validation studies are critically important. That is because test results from companies may be biased. In addition, companies often do not report on the user friendliness of rapid diagnostics. Antibody tests may be especially valuable for use in low and middle income countries that lack resources for widespread molecular testing for SARS-CoV-2 infection.
Study design
- Observational model
- Case only
- Time perspective
- Retrospective
- Number of arms
- 4
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Acute COVID infection | – | Diagnostic Test: Diagnostic testActive infection with positive RT-PCR |
| Convalescent COVID | – | Diagnostic Test: Diagnostic testRecent documented infection. Now asymptomatic and RT-PCR negative. |
| US Controls | – | Diagnostic Test: Diagnostic testHuman samples pre-COVID. |
| LMIC Controls | – | Diagnostic Test: Diagnostic testSamples from LMIC pre-COVID. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
- Study population
- * Sera/plasma from patients in St. Louis, Missouri who have been hospitalized and tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 * Sera/plasma from people in St. Louis, Missouri who have recovered from COVID-19 * Sera/plasma from from healthy humans in the US and from rural areas of low and middle income countries Note: No voluntary enrolment into this study will be conducted; all testing is to be conducted anonymously.
Key inclusion criteria (3 listed)
- Sera/plasma from patients who have been hospitalized and tested positive for SARS-CoV-2
- Sera/plasma from people who have recovered from COVID-19
- Sera/plasma from from healthy humans and persons with parasitic diseases
Key exclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Persons under the age of 18
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Diagnostic testThere is no intervention. This study will test deidentified archived biosamples. | Diagnostic test | Acute COVID infection, Convalescent COVID, LMIC Controls, US Controls |
Primary outcome
Test Sensitivity
Time frame: 2020
Test sensitivity relative to RT-PCR for acute samples; sensitivity relative to ELISA for convalescent samples.
Test Specificity
Time frame: 2020
Percent positivity with pre-COVID samples
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 4 Jun 2024.
- Background: PubMed 26666700Bogus J, Gankpala L, Fischer K, Krentel A, Weil GJ, Fischer PU, Kollie K, Bolay FK. Community Attitudes Toward Mass Drug Administration for Control and Elimination of Neglected Tropical Diseases After the 2014 Outbreak of Ebola Virus Disease in Lofa County, Liberia. Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2016 Mar;94(3):497-503. doi: 10.4269/ajtmh.15-0591. Epub 2015 Dec 14.
- Background: PubMed 28892473Chesnais CB, Awaca-Uvon NP, Bolay FK, Boussinesq M, Fischer PU, Gankpala L, Meite A, Missamou F, Pion SD, Weil GJ. A multi-center field study of two point-of-care tests for circulating Wuchereria bancrofti antigenemia in Africa. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2017 Sep 11;11(9):e0005703. doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0005703. eCollection 2017 Sep.
- Background: PubMed 31992387Corman VM, Landt O, Kaiser M, Molenkamp R, Meijer A, Chu DK, Bleicker T, Brunink S, Schneider J, Schmidt ML, Mulders DG, Haagmans BL, van der Veer B, van den Brink S, Wijsman L, Goderski G, Romette JL, Ellis J, Zambon M, Peiris M, Goossens H, Reusken C, Koopmans MP, Drosten C. Detection of 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) by real-time RT-PCR. Euro Surveill. 2020 Jan;25(3):2000045. doi: 10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2020.25.3.2000045.
- Background: PubMed 32104917Li Z, Yi Y, Luo X, Xiong N, Liu Y, Li S, Sun R, Wang Y, Hu B, Chen W, Zhang Y, Wang J, Huang B, Lin Y, Yang J, Cai W, Wang X, Cheng J, Chen Z, Sun K, Pan W, Zhan Z, Chen L, Ye F. Development and clinical application of a rapid IgM-IgG combined antibody test for SARS-CoV-2 infection diagnosis. J Med Virol. 2020 Sep;92(9):1518-1524. doi: 10.1002/jmv.25727. Epub 2020 Apr 13.
- Background: PubMed 32267220Okba NMA, Muller MA, Li W, Wang C, GeurtsvanKessel CH, Corman VM, Lamers MM, Sikkema RS, de Bruin E, Chandler FD, Yazdanpanah Y, Le Hingrat Q, Descamps D, Houhou-Fidouh N, Reusken CBEM, Bosch BJ, Drosten C, Koopmans MPG, Haagmans BL. Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2-Specific Antibody Responses in Coronavirus Disease Patients. Emerg Infect Dis. 2020 Jul;26(7):1478-1488. doi: 10.3201/eid2607.200841. Epub 2020 Jun 21.
- Background: PubMed 32245835Tang YW, Schmitz JE, Persing DH, Stratton CW. Laboratory Diagnosis of COVID-19: Current Issues and Challenges. J Clin Microbiol. 2020 May 26;58(6):e00512-20. doi: 10.1128/JCM.00512-20. Print 2020 May 26.
- Background: PubMed 23690552Weil GJ, Curtis KC, Fakoli L, Fischer K, Gankpala L, Lammie PJ, Majewski AC, Pelletreau S, Won KY, Bolay FK, Fischer PU. Laboratory and field evaluation of a new rapid test for detecting Wuchereria bancrofti antigen in human blood. Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2013 Jul;89(1):11-15. doi: 10.4269/ajtmh.13-0089. Epub 2013 May 20.
- Background: PubMed 15275155Weil GJ, Lammie PJ, Weiss N. The ICT Filariasis Test: A rapid-format antigen test for diagnosis of bancroftian filariasis. Parasitol Today. 1997 Oct;13(10):401-4. doi: 10.1016/s0169-4758(97)01130-7.
Related trials for COVID
Not yet recruitingPhase 1
Phase I Open-Label Safety Trial of Pembrolizumab for Neurological Post- Acute Sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 (PD1-PASC I)
Post-Acute COVID-19 Syndrome
Active, not recruitingPhase 1
A Safety and Immunogenicity Trial of OCU500, ChAd36 Vector Encoding SARS-CoV-2 Spike Vaccine Via Intranasal and Inhalational Routes in Previously Vaccinated Adults
COVID-19
Enrolling by invitation
Personalized Ventilator Settings for Patients on ECMO
Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS), Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation
Recruiting
Home-Based Exercise Tele-Rehabilitation After COVID-19
Post SARS-CoV2 (COVID-19)
Not yet recruitingPhase 1
A Safety, Reactogenicity and Immunogenicity Trial of RVX-sCPD9 Booster Intranasal COVID-19 Vaccine
COVID -19
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
The record lists no contact. Use the official record to reach the sponsor.
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
An observational study of COVID and Coronavirus, run by Washington University School of Medicine at 1 site in United States.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 3 inclusion and 1 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 4 Jun 2024. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in United States. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Test Sensitivity (time frame: 2020). The study lists 2 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT04360954, which also lists 8 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 4 Jun 2024.