COVID-19COVID-SERANCT04407559
COVID-SErology in Rheumatoid Arthritis (COVID-19)
An observational study of COVID-19 and Rheumatoid Arthritis, run by University Hospital, Montpellier at 1 site in France.
Trial summary
Due to the Covid-19 worldwide outbreak, fragile patients with immune diseases, notably rheumatoid arthritis (RA), have to be even more specifically and carefully followed-up. However, it has been shown that false postive serological results often occured while detecting antibodies directed against SARS-CoV-2 in… Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- COVID-19, Rheumatoid Arthritis
- What is being tested?
- Serological analyses to be lead on a pre-existing biobank
- How many people
- 216 participants
- Where
- 1 siteFrance
- Study dates
- 1 May 2020to 30 Sep 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
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Study population: Patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) Patients monitored at Montpellier University Hospital Patients having an available and frozen serum sample withdrawn before July 2019 Patients over 18 years old
Who may be able to join
- Samples from a pre-July 2019 RA patient biobank to ensure true negativity of Covid -19 (patients over 18 years old)
Who cannot join
- Patients who have traveled to China or Saudi Arabia and therefore may have encountered other coronaviruses.
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
About this study
Official title: Impact of the Rheumatoid Factor on Serological Testing Performance for Covid-19 in Rheumatoid Arthritis Patients
Due to the Covid-19 worldwide outbreak, fragile patients with immune diseases, notably rheumatoid arthritis (RA), have to be even more specifically and carefully followed-up. However, it has been shown that false postive serological results often occured while detecting antibodies directed against SARS-CoV-2 in patients with positive rheumatodoid factor (RF). The investigators propose here to investigated this issue. Therefore, the investigators will test three different immunoassays on this specific population. The investigators aim to establish these assays specificity and the levels of RF for which there is a risk of anti-SARS-CoV-2 false positivity and thus ensure a better follow-up of RA patients. The RF isotype will be analysed to determine whether there is a correlation and the impact of the presence of anti-CCP (citrullinated cyclic antipeptide antibodies) will be studied and assessed.
Read the detailed description
Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is the most common inflammatory rheumatism, affecting 0.5% to 1% of the European population. Characterized by symmetrical and distal erosive polyarthritis, its diagnosis is based on the association of the clinical assessment combined with the presence of a chronic biological inflammatory syndrome and of citrullinated cyclic antipeptide antibodies (CCP) and / or of rheumatoid factor. From a prognostic point of view, some factors allow the risk prediction of the progression to structural damage (bone erosion), such as the positivity of the rheumatoid factor or anti-CCP antibodies, and require the rapid introduction of basic immunosuppressive therapy or biotherapy. In the context of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, responsible for the COVID-19 disease, the interest of a serological test is essential from an epidemiological point of view in order to follow the evolution of the pandemic, and to adapt the strategy of de-confinement of the general population or of patients at risk. However, RA patients receiving biotherapy present an increased risk of infection. In this context of de-confinement, a SARS-CoV-2 serological analysis, before initiating RA patients future treatment or in order to adapt their current treatment, would be useful.
Detection of antibodies directed against SARS-CoV-2 by various detection kits is currently under evaluation. To the lack of serological test kits on the French market is added the complexity of verifying the sensitivity and specificity of these tests. On the other hand, the immune response to SARS-CoV-2 is complex and still quite unknown. The concomitant presence of several isotypes IgA, IgM and IgG is frequently observed. Thus, the isotypic switching of Ig does not seem to take place correctly in this disease case, which randers the serodiagnostics even more complicated to implement. Detection of the less specific IgMs would therefore be essential, in the case of SARS-CoV-2. Rheumatoid factor (RF) is an immunoglobulin (Ig), more often of the M type, directed against the Fc fragment of IgG. This antibody, although not directly pathogenic, is very frequently present in RA patients (70 to 80%), without being specific for this pathology since it can be observed in other autoimmune, infectious or hematological diseases as well. The presence of RF IgM, all the more in high titers, is problematic while performing many serological or immunological assays since these high levels can be responsible for false positive results.
During previous SARS epidemics (SARS-CoV-1 or MERS-CoV), false positive results of serological tests were observed. When detecting anti-SARS-CoV-1 IgG or IgM in patients who had not contracted SARS, the use of an ELISA kit, with plates coated with a cell lysate of Vero-E6 cells infected with SARS-CoV-1, had been shown to induce a low number of false positive results in healthy controls (less than 5%). However, the number of false positive results in patients with autoimmune diseases was much higher, and varied accordingly with the pathology (between 10% and 58%), the largest number of false positive results being obtained in lupus patients. This phenomenon can be explained by the use of an immune test using unpurified cell lysates, which contain antigens against which the autoantibodies present in the patient serum could react, thus distorting the outcome of the test. Other causes of increase in the false positive results rate have been described when performing SARS-CoV-1 serologies, such as the presence of active neoplasia, or because of a previous infection with another coronavirus. Indeed, other coronaviruses, such as HCoV-OC43 and HCoV-229E, display a nucleocapsid close to the one of SARS-CoV-1 : this similarity can be the source of cross-reactivity. The same phenomenon was observed with the latest coronavirus: it was therefore suggested to rather use recombinant antigens of SARS-CoV-2 in immunoassays, such as ELISA for instance Given the similarity between SARS-CoV1 and SARS-CoV2, it is likely that the various elements causing false positive results during serological tests for SARS-CoV-1, in particular the presence of auto-antibodies including RF, could also cause false positive results when performing serological tests targeting SARS-CoV-2. A recent Chinese study showed that a moderate or high rate of RF was associated with a significant rate of false positive results when searching for anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgM with a ELISA kit, which plates were however coated with recombinant antigen. The authors therefore proposed to include a urea dissociation step into the ELISA protocol, which seemed to improve the specificity of the test, without altering its sensitivity.
It thus appears essential to assess the influence of RF, for its different isotypes (IgG, IgM, IgA), on various serological tests for SARS-CoV-2 available in France, in order to better assess these tests specificity.
The investigators propose to evaluate and compare 3 different serological tests available for the detection of specific SARS-CoV-2 IgG and IgM. The rate of false positive results obtained for each type of test will be evaluated on sera originated from patients with RA who have never been in contact with SARS-CoV-2, since these sera were withdrawn before July 2019. The relation between the incidence of SARS-Cov-2 serological assays false positive results and RF antibody levels could be estimated, as well as the characterization of RF.
- Conditions
- COVID-19, Rheumatoid Arthritis
- Being tested
- Serological analyses to be lead on a pre-existing biobank
- Medical subject headings
- COVID-19, Arthritis, Rheumatoid
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Serological analyses to be lead on a pre-existing biobankOther
3 immunoassays will be used according to the procedure described (Demey-2020; Tuaillon-2020) :
- WuHan UNscience Biotechnology Co., Ltd (Chine). COVID-19 IgG/IgM Rapid Test Kit, (Wuhan, China), will be refered as UNscience
- Chongqing iSIA BIO-Technology Co., Ltd (Chine). 2019-nCoV IgM/IgG Diagnostic Test Kit ; (Chongqing, China), will be refered as iSIA
- Xiamen Biotime Biotechnology Co. Ldt (Chine). (SARS-CoV-2) IgM/IgG Rapid Qualitative Test Kit, will be refered as Biotime.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Groupe 1 | Group 1: Rheumatoid arthritis seropositive for RF (+) Receives: Other: Serological analyses to be lead on a pre-existing biobank | |
| Groupe 2 | Group 2: Rheumatoid arthritis seronegative for RF (-) Receives: Other: Serological analyses to be lead on a pre-existing biobank |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Evaluate the false positive results rate
Evaluate the false positive results rate when using each one of the three SARS-CoV-2 serology tests in patients with rheumatoid factor plasma levels, so as to define the specificity of these tests in this RA population. all serum samples will be tested by the 3 different immunoassays. The RF plasma levels have already been measured (routine exam) and are written in the patients files. The results will be analysed, the data proceeded and hopefully we will be able to answer the question.
Measured: 4 months
Secondary outcomes (4)
Characterize the RF isotype (IgG, IgM or IgA) associated
Characterize the RF isotype (IgG, IgM or IgA) associated with the false positivity of the test.all serum samples will be tested by the 3 different immunoassays. The RF isotype will be established using the routine method and the results of anti-CCP and RF plasma levels are already known and this information is available in the patients files. The results will be analysed, the data proceeded and hopefully we will be able to answer the questions
Measured: 4 months
Determine the influence of RA on the false positivity rate in subjects
Determine the influence of RA on the false positivity rate in subjects with negative RF titer. All serum samples will be tested by the 3 different immunoassays. The RF isotype will be established using the routine method and the results of anti-CCP and RF plasma levels are already known and this information is available in the patients files. The results will be analysed, the data proceeded and hopefully we will be able to answer the questions
Measured: 4 months
Assess the influence of the presence of anti-CCP on the false positivity of the SARS-CoV-2 test
Assess the influence of the presence of anti-CCP on the false positivity of the SARS-CoV-2 test : all serum samples will be tested by the 3 different immunoassays. The RF isotype will be established using the routine method and the results of anti-CCP and RF plasma levels are already known and this information is available in the patients files. The results will be analysed, the data proceeded and hopefully we will be able to answer the questions.
Measured: 4 months
Assess the relation between the RF plasma levels and the false positivity of the SARS-CoV-2 test
Assess the relation between the RF plasma levels and the false positivity of the SARS-CoV-2 test : all serum samples will be tested by the 3 different immunoassays. The RF isotype will be established using the routine method and the results of anti-CCP and RF plasma levels are already known and this information is available in the patients files. The results will be analysed, the data proceeded and hopefully we will be able to answer the questions.
Measured: 4 months
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted29 May 2020
- Study start1 May 2020
- Primary completion1 Sep 2020
- Study completion30 Sep 2020
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for COVID-19Studies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by University Hospital, MontpellierThe 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
- Cohort
- Time perspective
- Retrospective
- Enrolment
- 216 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- University Hospital, Montpellier
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Rosanna FERREIRA, MD, Principal investigator, UH Montpellier
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT04407559
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- RECHMPL20_0330
- Acronym
- COVID-SERA
- Status last verified
- Dec 2020
- First submitted
- 27 May 2020
- Last updated
- 29 Dec 2020
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- Undecided: NC
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 29 Dec 2020. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Impact of the Rheumatoid Factor on Serological Testing Performance for Covid-19 in Rheumatoid Arthritis Patients
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT04407559
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- COVID-SERA / RECHMPL20_0330
- Conditions
- COVID-19, Rheumatoid Arthritis
- Study type
- Observational
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 216 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- University Hospital, MontpellierUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 1 May 2020 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 1 Sep 2020 (actual)
- Study completion
- 30 Sep 2020 (actual)
- First posted
- 29 May 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.
Due to the Covid-19 worldwide outbreak, fragile patients with immune diseases, notably rheumatoid arthritis (RA), have to be even more specifically and carefully followed-up. However, it has been shown that false postive serological results often occured while detecting antibodies directed against SARS-CoV-2 in patients with positive rheumatodoid factor (RF). The investigators propose here to investigated this issue. Therefore, the investigators will test three different immunoassays on this specific population. The investigators aim to establish these assays specificity and the levels of RF for which there is a risk of anti-SARS-CoV-2 false positivity and thus ensure a better follow-up of RA patients. The RF isotype will be analysed to determine whether there is a correlation and the impact of the presence of anti-CCP (citrullinated cyclic antipeptide antibodies) will be studied and assessed.
Detailed description
Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is the most common inflammatory rheumatism, affecting 0.5% to 1% of the European population. Characterized by symmetrical and distal erosive polyarthritis, its diagnosis is based on the association of the clinical assessment combined with the presence of a chronic biological inflammatory syndrome and of citrullinated cyclic antipeptide antibodies (CCP) and / or of rheumatoid factor. From a prognostic point of view, some factors allow the risk prediction of the progression to structural damage (bone erosion), such as the positivity of the rheumatoid factor or anti-CCP antibodies, and require the rapid introduction of basic immunosuppressive therapy or biotherapy. In the context of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, responsible for the COVID-19 disease, the interest of a serological test is essential from an epidemiological point of view in order to follow the evolution of the pandemic, and to adapt the strategy of de-confinement of the general population or of patients at risk. However, RA patients receiving biotherapy present an increased risk of infection. In this context of de-confinement, a SARS-CoV-2 serological analysis, before initiating RA patients future treatment or in order to adapt their current treatment, would be useful.
Detection of antibodies directed against SARS-CoV-2 by various detection kits is currently under evaluation. To the lack of serological test kits on the French market is added the complexity of verifying the sensitivity and specificity of these tests. On the other hand, the immune response to SARS-CoV-2 is complex and still quite unknown. The concomitant presence of several isotypes IgA, IgM and IgG is frequently observed. Thus, the isotypic switching of Ig does not seem to take place correctly in this disease case, which randers the serodiagnostics even more complicated to implement. Detection of the less specific IgMs would therefore be essential, in the case of SARS-CoV-2. Rheumatoid factor (RF) is an immunoglobulin (Ig), more often of the M type, directed against the Fc fragment of IgG. This antibody, although not directly pathogenic, is very frequently present in RA patients (70 to 80%), without being specific for this pathology since it can be observed in other autoimmune, infectious or hematological diseases as well. The presence of RF IgM, all the more in high titers, is problematic while performing many serological or immunological assays since these high levels can be responsible for false positive results.
During previous SARS epidemics (SARS-CoV-1 or MERS-CoV), false positive results of serological tests were observed. When detecting anti-SARS-CoV-1 IgG or IgM in patients who had not contracted SARS, the use of an ELISA kit, with plates coated with a cell lysate of Vero-E6 cells infected with SARS-CoV-1, had been shown to induce a low number of false positive results in healthy controls (less than 5%). However, the number of false positive results in patients with autoimmune diseases was much higher, and varied accordingly with the pathology (between 10% and 58%), the largest number of false positive results being obtained in lupus patients. This phenomenon can be explained by the use of an immune test using unpurified cell lysates, which contain antigens against which the autoantibodies present in the patient serum could react, thus distorting the outcome of the test. Other causes of increase in the false positive results rate have been described when performing SARS-CoV-1 serologies, such as the presence of active neoplasia, or because of a previous infection with another coronavirus. Indeed, other coronaviruses, such as HCoV-OC43 and HCoV-229E, display a nucleocapsid close to the one of SARS-CoV-1 : this similarity can be the source of cross-reactivity. The same phenomenon was observed with the latest coronavirus: it was therefore suggested to rather use recombinant antigens of SARS-CoV-2 in immunoassays, such as ELISA for instance Given the similarity between SARS-CoV1 and SARS-CoV2, it is likely that the various elements causing false positive results during serological tests for SARS-CoV-1, in particular the presence of auto-antibodies including RF, could also cause false positive results when performing serological tests targeting SARS-CoV-2. A recent Chinese study showed that a moderate or high rate of RF was associated with a significant rate of false positive results when searching for anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgM with a ELISA kit, which plates were however coated with recombinant antigen. The authors therefore proposed to include a urea dissociation step into the ELISA protocol, which seemed to improve the specificity of the test, without altering its sensitivity.
It thus appears essential to assess the influence of RF, for its different isotypes (IgG, IgM, IgA), on various serological tests for SARS-CoV-2 available in France, in order to better assess these tests specificity.
The investigators propose to evaluate and compare 3 different serological tests available for the detection of specific SARS-CoV-2 IgG and IgM. The rate of false positive results obtained for each type of test will be evaluated on sera originated from patients with RA who have never been in contact with SARS-CoV-2, since these sera were withdrawn before July 2019. The relation between the incidence of SARS-Cov-2 serological assays false positive results and RF antibody levels could be estimated, as well as the characterization of RF.
Study design
- Observational model
- Cohort
- Time perspective
- Retrospective
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Groupe 1 | – | Other: Serological analyses to be lead on a pre-existing biobankGroup 1: Rheumatoid arthritis seropositive for RF (+) |
| Groupe 2 | – | Other: Serological analyses to be lead on a pre-existing biobankGroup 2: Rheumatoid arthritis seronegative for RF (-) |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
- Study population
- Patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) Patients monitored at Montpellier University Hospital Patients having an available and frozen serum sample withdrawn before July 2019 Patients over 18 years old
Key inclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Samples from a pre-July 2019 RA patient biobank to ensure true negativity of Covid -19 (patients over 18 years old)
Key exclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Patients who have traveled to China or Saudi Arabia and therefore may have encountered other coronaviruses.
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Serological analyses to be lead on a pre-existing biobank3 immunoassays will be used according to the procedure described (Demey-2020; Tuaillon-2020) : * WuHan UNscience Biotechnology Co., Ltd (Chine). COVID-19 IgG/IgM Rapid Test Kit, (Wuhan, China), will be refered as UNscience * Chongqing iSIA BIO-Technology Co., Ltd (Chine). 2019-nCoV IgM/IgG Diagnostic Test Kit ; (Chongqing, China), will be refered as iSIA * Xiamen Biotime Biotechnology Co. Ldt (Chine). (SARS-CoV-2) IgM/IgG Rapid Qualitative Test Kit, will be refered as Biotime. | Other | Groupe 1, Groupe 2 |
Primary outcome
Evaluate the false positive results rate
Time frame: 4 months
Evaluate the false positive results rate when using each one of the three SARS-CoV-2 serology tests in patients with rheumatoid factor plasma levels, so as to define the specificity of these tests in this RA population. all serum samples will be tested by the 3 different immunoassays. The RF plasma levels have already been measured (routine exam) and are written in the patients files. The results will be analysed, the data proceeded and hopefully we will be able to answer the question.
4 secondary outcomes
Characterize the RF isotype (IgG, IgM or IgA) associated
Time frame: 4 months
Determine the influence of RA on the false positivity rate in subjects
Time frame: 4 months
Assess the influence of the presence of anti-CCP on the false positivity of the SARS-CoV-2 test
Time frame: 4 months
Assess the relation between the RF plasma levels and the false positivity of the SARS-CoV-2 test
Time frame: 4 months
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 29 Dec 2020.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: Undecided. NC
Related trials for COVID-19
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
Active, not recruiting
Intervention to Address Disparate Mental Health Consequences of COVID-19 Pandemic on Latinx and African Newcomers
Mental Health Issue, Mental Health Disorder
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.
Rosanna FERREIRA, MD principal investigator
UH Montpellier
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-19 and Rheumatoid Arthritis, run by University Hospital, Montpellier at 1 site in France.
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 1 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 29 Dec 2020. 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 France. 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?
Evaluate the false positive results rate (time frame: 4 months). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
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 29 Dec 2020.