| Literature DB >> 32357808 |
Baoqing Sun1, Ying Feng1, Xiaoneng Mo2, Peiyan Zheng1, Qian Wang3, Pingchao Li3, Ping Peng2, Xiaoqing Liu1, Zhilong Chen3, Huimin Huang1, Fan Zhang3, Wenting Luo1, Xuefeng Niu1, Peiyu Hu3, Longyu Wang3, Hui Peng2, Zhifeng Huang1, Liqiang Feng3, Feng Li2, Fuchun Zhang2, Fang Li2, Nanshan Zhong1, Ling Chen1,2,3.
Abstract
The emerging COVID-19 caused by SARS-CoV-2 infection poses severe challenges to global public health. Serum antibody testing is becoming one of the critical methods for the diagnosis of COVID-19 patients. We investigated IgM and IgG responses against SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid (N) and spike (S) protein after symptom onset in the intensive care unit (ICU) and non-ICU patients. 130 blood samples from 38 COVID-19 patients were collected. The levels of IgM and IgG specific to N and S protein were detected by ELISA. A series of blood samples were collected along the disease course from the same patient, including 11 ICU patients and 27 non-ICU patients for longitudinal analysis. N and S specific IgM and IgG (N-IgM, N-IgG, S-IgM, S-IgG) in non-ICU patients increased after symptom onset. N-IgM and S-IgM in some non-ICU patients reached a peak in the second week, while N-IgG and S-IgG continued to increase in the third week. The combined detection of N and S specific IgM and IgG could identify up to 75% of SARS-CoV-2 infected patients in the first week. S-IgG was significantly higher in non-ICU patients than in ICU patients in the third week. In contrast, N-IgG was significantly higher in ICU patients than in non-ICU patients. The increase of S-IgG positively correlated with the decrease of C-reactive protein (CRP) in non-ICU patients. N and S specific IgM and IgG increased gradually after symptom onset and can be used for detection of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Analysis of the dynamics of S-IgG may help to predict prognosis.Entities:
Keywords: C-reactive protein; COVID-19; IgG; IgM; SARS-CoV-2
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32357808 PMCID: PMC7273175 DOI: 10.1080/22221751.2020.1762515
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Emerg Microbes Infect ISSN: 2222-1751 Impact factor: 7.163
Basic information of COVID-19 patients.
| Group A: non-ICU patients ( | Group B: ICU patients ( | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Median ages (IQR) | 44.0 (32.0–56.0) | 58.0 (49.0–69.5) | 0.05 |
| Gender | |||
| Female | 13(48%) | 1(9%) | 0.03 |
| Male | 14(52%) | 10(91%) | .. |
| Median days of admission after symptom onset (IQR) | |||
| 4(3.75–7) | 5(2–10.5) | 0.35 | |
| Median hospital Stay days (IQR) | |||
| 19.0 (14.3–22.5) | 31.0 (30.0–33.5) | <0.001 | |
| Median days of SARS-COV-2 Nucleic Acid negative after symptom onset (IQR) | |||
| 13.0 (12.0–16.3) | 31.0 (22.5–32.0) | <0.001 | |
| Presenting symptoms | |||
| Fever | 26(96%) | 10(91%) | 0.5 |
| Cough | 22(81%) | 11(100%) | 0.29 |
| Shortness of breath | 5(19%) | 8(73%) | 0.003 |
| Anorexia | 8(30%) | 10(91%) | <0.001 |
| Underlying medical disorders | |||
| None | 14(52%) | 5(45%) | >0.99 |
| Hypertension | 5(19%) | 4(36%) | 0.4 |
| Chronic pulmonary disease | 0(0%) | 2(18%) | 0.08 |
| Coronary heart disease | 1(4%) | 0(0%) | >0.99 |
| Chronic gastritis | 2(7%) | 0(0%) | >0.99 |
| Liver cyst | 1(4%) | 0(0%) | >0.99 |
| Tuberculosis | 1(4%) | 0(0%) | >0.99 |
| Hyperlipidemia | 1(4%) | 0(0%) | >0.99 |
| Fatty liver | 1(4%) | 0(0%) | >0.99 |
| Thalassemia | 1(4%) | 0(0%) | >0.99 |
| Colon cancer | 1(4%) | 0(0%) | >0.99 |
| Diabetes | 0(0%) | 5(45%) | <0.001 |
IQR: Interquartile range.
Seropositive rate (%).
| Weeks | N-IgM | N-IgG | S-IgM | S-IgG | N-IgM + N-IgG | S-IgM + S-IgG | N-IgM + S-IgM | N-IgG + S-IgG | N-IgM + S-IgM + N-IgG + S-IgG |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 41.7 | 41.7 | 41.7 | 58.3 | 58.3 | 66.7 | 58.3 | 66.7 | 75.0 |
| 2 | 73.7 | 84.2 | 68.4 | 78.9 | 94.7 | 89.5 | 84.2 | 94.7 | 94.7 |
| 3 | 73.7 | 100.0 | 73.7 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 89.5 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
N-IgM: N protein specific IgM; N-IgG: N protein specific IgG; S-IgM: S protein specific IgM; S-IgG: S protein specific IgG.
Figure 1.The seropositive rates of N and S specific IgM and IgG antibody responses in non-ICU patients after symptom onset. A. The changes in seropositive rates of N-IgM, N-IgG, S-IgM and S-IgG in 27 non-ICU patients. B. The changes in seropositive rates of N-IgM + N-IgG, S-IgM + S-IgG, N-IgM + S-IgM, N-IgG + S-IgG, N-IgM + S-IgM + N-IgG + S-IgG in 27 non-ICU patients.
Figure 2.Kinetics of N and S specific IgM and IgG responses in non-ICU patients and ICU patients. (A) N-IgM, (B) N-IgG, (C) S-IgM, (D) S-IgG responses in 7 non-ICU patients; (E) N-IgM, (F) N-IgG, (G) S-IgM, (H) S-IgG antibodies response in 11 ICU patients.
SARS-COV-2 N and S specific IgM and IgG responses (OD450nm: mean + SD).
| Weeks after onset | Patients | N | S | The ratio of N-IgG/S-IgG | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IgM | IgG | IgM | IgG | |||||
| Week1 | non-ICU ( | 0.44 | 0.51 | 0.358 | 0.36 | 0.24 | 0.132 | 2.56 |
| ICU ( | 0.99 | 1.31 | 0.316 | 0.36 | 0.23 | 0.145 | 6.04 | |
| 0.061 | 0.020 | 0.500 | 0.481 | 0.025 | ||||
| Week2 | non-ICU ( | 0.51 | 1.0 | 0.004 | 0.42 | 0.58 | 0.112 | 2.87 |
| ICU ( | 1.51 | 2.38 | 0.014 | 0.69 | 0.57 | 0.216 | 5.98 | |
| 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.026 | 0.467 | 0.024 | ||||
| Week3 | non-ICU ( | 0.6 | 1.93 | 0.001 | 0.64 | 1.25 | 0.001 | 2.11 |
| ICU ( | 1.50 | 2.92 | <0.001 | 0.70 | 1.01 | 0.025 | 3.38 | |
| <0.001 | <0.001 | 0.335 | 0.028 | 0.011 | ||||
ICU: intensive care unit. N-IgG: N protein specific IgG; S-IgG: S protein specific IgG.
Figure 3.The correlation between N and S specific IgM and IgG responses in non-ICU patients and ICU patients. A. The correlation between S-IgG and S-IgM in non-ICU patients; B. The correlation between N-IgG and N-IgM in non-ICU patients; C. The correlation between S-IgG and S-IgM in ICU patients; D. The correlation between N-IgG and N-IgM in ICU patients. The Pearson correlation coefficient was used to measure the strength of the correlation between IgM and IgG antibodies. The correlation coefficient was calculated using Student’s t-test, a P-value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. *, P < 0.05; **, P < 0.01; ***, P < 0.001.
Figure 4.The correlation between N and S specific IgM and IgG responses with CRP in non-ICU patients. A. The correlation between N-IgG and the reduction of CRP; B. The correlation between S-IgG and the reduction of CRP; C. The correlation between N-IgM and CRP; D. The correlation between S-IgM and CRP. The Pearson correlation coefficient was used to measure the strength of the correlation between CPR and IgM or IgG antibodies.
Figure 5.The N and S specific IgM and IgG responses in non-ICU patients and ICU patients. A. Comparison of N-IgM responses between non-ICU and ICU patients; B. Comparison of N-IgG responses between non-ICU and ICU patients; C. Comparison of S-IgM responses between non-ICU and ICU patients; D. Comparison of S-IgG responses between non-ICU and ICU patients. E. Comparison of N-IgG/S-IgG ratio between non-ICU and ICU patients. Correlation coefficient was calculated using Student’s t test, a P-value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. *, P < 0.05; **, P < 0.01; ***, P < 0.001.