• Antibody affinity as a driver of signal generation in a paper-based immunoassay for Ebola virus surveillance

      Murray, Lara P.; Govindan, Ramesh; Mora, Andrea C.; Munro, James B.; Mace, Charles R. (2021-06-01)
      During epidemics, such as the frequent and devastating Ebola virus outbreaks that have historically plagued regions of Africa, serological surveillance efforts are critical for viral containment and the development of effective antiviral therapeutics. Antibody serology can also be used retrospectively for population-level surveillance to provide a more complete estimate of total infections. Ebola surveillance efforts rely on enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISAs), which restrict testing to laboratories and are not adaptable for use in resource-limited settings. In this manuscript, we describe a paper-based immunoassay capable of detecting anti-Ebola IgG using Ebola virus envelope glycoprotein ectodomain (GP) as the affinity reagent. We evaluated seven monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) against GP-KZ52, 13C6, 4G7, 2G4, c6D8, 13F6, and 4F3-to elucidate the impact of binding affinity and binding epitope on assay performance and, ultimately, result interpretation. We used biolayer interferometry to characterize the binding of each antibody to GP before assessing their performance in our paper-based device. Binding affinity (KD) and on rate (kon) were major factors influencing the sensitivity of the paper-based immunoassay. mAbs with the best KD (3-25 nM) exhibited the lowest limits of detection (ca. mug mL(-1)), while mAbs with KD > 25 nM were undetectable in our device. Additionally, and most surprisingly, we determined that observed signals in paper devices were directly proportional to kon. These results highlight the importance of ensuring that the quality of recognition reagents is sufficient to support desired assay performance and suggest that the strength of an individual's immune response can impact the interpretation of assay results.
    • Performance of the G4 Xpert(R) MTB/RIF assay for the detection of Mycobacterium tuberculosis and rifampin resistance: a retrospective case-control study of analytical and clinical samples from high- and low-tuberculosis prevalence settings

      Dharan, Nila J.; Blakemore, Robert; Sloutsky, Alexander; Kaur, Devinder; Alexander, Richard C.; Ghajar, Minoo; Musser, Kimberlee A.; Escuyer, Vincent E.; Rowlinson, Marie-Claire; Crowe, Susanne; et al. (2016-12-20)
      BACKGROUND: The Xpert(R) MTB/RIF (Xpert) assay is a rapid PCR-based assay for the detection of Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex DNA (MTBc) and mutations associated with rifampin resistance (RIF). An updated version introduced in 2011, the G4 Xpert, included modifications to probe B and updated analytic software. METHODS: An analytical study was performed to assess Xpert detection of mutations associated with rifampin resistance in rifampin-susceptible and -resistant isolates. A clinical study was performed in which specimens from US and non-US persons suspected of tuberculosis (TB) were tested to determine Xpert performance characteristics. All specimens underwent smear microscopy, mycobacterial culture, conventional drug-susceptibility testing and Xpert testing; DNA from isolates with discordant rifampin resistance results was sequenced. RESULTS: Among 191 laboratory-prepared isolates in the analytical study, Xpert sensitivity for detection of rifampin resistance associated mutations was 97.7% and specificity was 90.8%, which increased to 99.0% after DNA sequencing analysis of the discordant samples. Of the 1,096 subjects in the four clinical studies, 49% were from the US. Overall, Xpert detected MTBc in 439 of 468 culture-positive specimens for a sensitivity of 93.8% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 91.2%-95.7%) and did not detect MTBc in 620 of 628 culture-negative specimens for a specificity of 98.7% (95% CI: 97.5%-99.4%). Sensitivity was 99.7% among smear-positive cases, and 76.1% among smear-negative cases. Non-determinate MTBc detection and false-positive RIF resistance results were low (1.2 and 0.9%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: The updated Xpert assay retained the high sensitivity and specificity of the previous assay versions and demonstrated low rates of non-determinate and RIF resistance false positive results.