The virus continues to spread in certain countries, yet has begun to taper off in others. It remains important in developing accurate tests for the virus. Currently, patients suspected of being infected with the virus will undergo a test that looks for viral RNA, using PCR. PCR amplifies these little molecules to detectable quantities. However, it is vital now that we develop a serological assay to detect a virus. Serological assays detect proteins, and in this case, antibodies.
The CDC continues to suggest that currently developed serological assays must be tested in the lab. If a assay fails to be validated but put into use, it will deliver erroneous information. This could lead to misjudged patient tracking. The necessity therefore lies in the necessity to track previously infected patients, especially those who are asymptomatic. In this way, we can target regions that have higher case loads and implement the necessary measures. These tests will help determine that rate of spread in communities, too. Furthermore, once a vaccine has been developed, it is vitally important to have these assays to test the efficacy of the vaccine to produce an immune response.
In a yet-to-be peer-reviewed paper (though may have large implications), it was shown that detectable concentrations of antibodies only appear 10-15 days after the initial infection. This is to be expected as the immune response (B cell clonal replication) takes about two weeks to work. More surprisingly, it was shown that patients who only had mild symptoms, showed a low percentage of antibody production, specifically neutralizing antibodies. One implication is that there is another component to the immune response then just neutralizing antibodies. This could be antibodies that mark cells for phagocytosis. It also puts to question the efficiency of serological assays. If they are to be effective, we must develop highly sensitive tests or find other proteins involved in the immune response to test. Good luck scientist! We’re counting on you!
BillyBiome 