
Over the last three years, after the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic, an unprecedented number of novel diagnostic tests have been developed. Assays to evaluate the immune response to SARS-CoV-2 have been widely considered as part of the control strategy. The lateral flow immunoassay (LFIA), to detect both IgM and IgG against SARS-CoV-2, has been widely studied as a point-of-care (POC) test. Compared to laboratory tests, LFIAs are faster, cheaper and user-friendly, thus available also in areas with low economic resources. Soon after the onset of the pandemic, numerous kits for rapid antibody detection were put on the market with an emergency use authorization. However, since then, scientists have tried to better define the accuracy of these tests and their usefulness in different contexts. In fact, while during the first phase of the pandemic LFIAs for antibody detection were auxiliary to molecular tests for the diagnosis of COVID-19, successively these tests became a tool of seroprevalence surveillance to address infection control policies. When in 2021 a massive vaccination campaign was implemented worldwide, the interest in LFIA reemerged due to the need to establish the extent and the longevity of immunization in the vaccinated population and to establish priorities to guide health policies in low-income countries with limited access to vaccines. Here, we summarize the accuracy, the advantages and limits of LFIAs as POC tests for antibody detection, highlighting the efforts that have been made to improve this technology over the last few years.
Citation: Lucia Spicuzza, Davide Campagna, Chiara Di Maria, Enrico Sciacca, Salvatore Mancuso, Carlo Vancheri, Gianluca Sambataro. An update on lateral flow immunoassay for the rapid detection of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies[J]. AIMS Microbiology, 2023, 9(2): 375-401. doi: 10.3934/microbiol.2023020
[1] | Deniz Sevinç . Volatility spillovers among MIST stock markets. Data Science in Finance and Economics, 2022, 2(2): 80-95. doi: 10.3934/DSFE.2022004 |
[2] | Nurun Najwa Bahari, Hafizah Bahaludin, Munira Ismail, Fatimah Abdul Razak . Network, correlation, and community structure of the financial sector of Bursa Malaysia before, during, and after COVID-19. Data Science in Finance and Economics, 2024, 4(3): 362-387. doi: 10.3934/DSFE.2024016 |
[3] | Moses Khumalo, Hopolang Mashele, Modisane Seitshiro . Quantification of the stock market value at risk by using FIAPARCH, HYGARCH and FIGARCH models. Data Science in Finance and Economics, 2023, 3(4): 380-400. doi: 10.3934/DSFE.2023022 |
[4] | Jiamin Cheng, Yuanying Jiang . How can carbon markets drive the development of renewable energy sector? Empirical evidence from China. Data Science in Finance and Economics, 2024, 4(2): 249-269. doi: 10.3934/DSFE.2024010 |
[5] | Kuo-Shing Chen . Interlinkages between Bitcoin, green financial assets, oil, and emerging stock markets. Data Science in Finance and Economics, 2024, 4(1): 160-187. doi: 10.3934/DSFE.2024006 |
[6] | Dachen Sheng, Opale Guyot . Market power, internal and external monitoring, and firm distress in the Chinese market. Data Science in Finance and Economics, 2024, 4(2): 285-308. doi: 10.3934/DSFE.2024012 |
[7] | Zimei Huang, Zhenghui Li . What reflects investor sentiment? Empirical evidence from China. Data Science in Finance and Economics, 2021, 1(3): 235-252. doi: 10.3934/DSFE.2021013 |
[8] | Katleho Makatjane, Ntebogang Moroke . Examining stylized facts and trends of FTSE/JSE TOP40: a parametric and Non-Parametric approach. Data Science in Finance and Economics, 2022, 2(3): 294-320. doi: 10.3934/DSFE.2022015 |
[9] | Samuel Asante Gyamerah, Collins Abaitey . Modelling and forecasting the volatility of bitcoin futures: the role of distributional assumption in GARCH models. Data Science in Finance and Economics, 2022, 2(3): 321-334. doi: 10.3934/DSFE.2022016 |
[10] | Nitesha Dwarika . The risk-return relationship in South Africa: tail optimization of the GARCH-M approach. Data Science in Finance and Economics, 2022, 2(4): 391-415. doi: 10.3934/DSFE.2022020 |
Over the last three years, after the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic, an unprecedented number of novel diagnostic tests have been developed. Assays to evaluate the immune response to SARS-CoV-2 have been widely considered as part of the control strategy. The lateral flow immunoassay (LFIA), to detect both IgM and IgG against SARS-CoV-2, has been widely studied as a point-of-care (POC) test. Compared to laboratory tests, LFIAs are faster, cheaper and user-friendly, thus available also in areas with low economic resources. Soon after the onset of the pandemic, numerous kits for rapid antibody detection were put on the market with an emergency use authorization. However, since then, scientists have tried to better define the accuracy of these tests and their usefulness in different contexts. In fact, while during the first phase of the pandemic LFIAs for antibody detection were auxiliary to molecular tests for the diagnosis of COVID-19, successively these tests became a tool of seroprevalence surveillance to address infection control policies. When in 2021 a massive vaccination campaign was implemented worldwide, the interest in LFIA reemerged due to the need to establish the extent and the longevity of immunization in the vaccinated population and to establish priorities to guide health policies in low-income countries with limited access to vaccines. Here, we summarize the accuracy, the advantages and limits of LFIAs as POC tests for antibody detection, highlighting the efforts that have been made to improve this technology over the last few years.
When searching the literature, we noticed that several propositions have been made by several researchers to find kernels that can be used to obtain fractional differential operators. The main reason for this is that, real world problems show signs of processes resembling behaviors of some mathematical functions. Riemann, Liouville, Cauchy and Abel works have led to a fractional calculus with a power law kernel. Their work was later modified by Caputo; this version has been used in many fields of science because of its ability to allow classical initial conditions [1]. Prabhakar suggested a different kernel as a product of power-law and the generalized Mittag-Leffler function with three parameters. This version has also attracted the attention of many researchers, studies have been done on theory as well as on applications. Indeed, the two kernels have their specific values, for example, power-law helps only to replicate processes exhibiting power-law behavior, while the product of the power-law and the generalized three-parameters Mittag-Leffler has also its field of application [2]. As nature is complex, a new kernel was suggested by Caputo and Fabrizio, a special exponential kernel with Delta Dirac properties. A differential operator that is in fashion nowadays due to its ability to replicate processes following fading memory. Indeed, this kernel brought a new shift into fractional calculus, as the concept of the fractional derivative with a non-singular kernel was introduced [3]. A point made by some researcher about the non-fractionality of the kernel led to a new kernel, the generalized Mittag-Leffler function with one parameter. This version was suggested by Atangana and Baleanu, constituting another new step forward in the field of fractional calculus. The operators have been used in several fields of studies with great success [4]. In [5], the basic theory of fractional differentiation, existence-uniqueness theorems and analytical numerical methods of solution of fractional differential equations are presented. In [6], the authors examined Noether's theorems of fractional generalized Birkhoffian systems in terms of classical and combined Caputo derivatives. The development of the time-fractional damage model for hyperelastic body is considered in [7]. While looking at nature and its complexities, one can with no doubt conclude that these suggested kernels are not enough to predict all complex behaviors of our universe. On this note, one will proceed to search for a different kernel or modified kernel, or a class of functions that will be used to introduce new differential operators. Sabatier recently presented some variants of kernels that will also open new doors for investigation [8]. In addition to these outstanding contributions, several other ideas have been suggested, for example the concept of short memory was suggested and a fractional derivative in the Caputo sense has been defined for different values of fractional orders. The idea is to have a different type of variable-order derivative unlike the well-known version that considers a fractional orders. The idea is initiated to have a different type of variable order derivative unlike the well-known version that considers a fractional-order to be a function of time. This case was suggested by Wu et al. [9] and applied in chaos. On the other hand, researchers have noticed that several real-world problems exhibit processes with different behaviors as a function of time and space. A particular case is a passage from deterministic to stochastic, or from power law to exponential decay. It was noted that existing differential operators may not be able to account for these behaviors, thus piecewise differential and integral operators were introduced to deal with problems exhibiting crossover behaviors [10]. The main aim of this note is to provide a critical analysis of the possible applications, advantages, and disadvantages of these two concepts.
We will illustrate the motivation with some examples.
Death body decay in different temperatures. Consider a corpse found in a snowy place, and assume that such body has been found after 20 days. The corpse is taken and brought to the house and kept in a normal temperature for a few days and later put in a mortuary and buried. The main aim here is to replicate the process of decay. The first part will provide a very low decay. The second part will provide a fast decay, the third part will again be a fast process and finally, a slow process. Indeed, slow and fast processes can be characterized by some mathematical functions. The power-law function is
t−α. | (2.1) |
The exponential decay function with a Dirac delta property is
11−αexp[−α1−αt]. | (2.2) |
However, a crossover from fast to slow decay processes can be modeled using the following Mittag-Leffler function with Delta-Dirac property
11−αEα[−α1−αtα]. | (2.3) |
The process can be divided into several intervals to capture each behavior. In the first part, one can have
C0Dαty(t)=−λ1y(t)if0<t≤T1. | (2.4) |
The second processes can be
CFT1Dαty(t)=−λ2y(t)ifT1<t≤T2. | (2.5) |
The two last parts will be characterized by
ABCT2Dαty(t)=−λ3y(t)ifT2<t≤T. | (2.6) |
Thus the whole process will be a system with the following crossover behaviors
{C0Dαty(t)=−λ1y(t)if0<t≤T1,CFT1Dαty(t)=−λ2y(t)ifT1<t≤T2,ABCT2Dαty(t)=−λ3y(t)ifT2<t≤T. | (2.7) |
Therefore in general the concept of piecewise derivative has been introduced.
In this section, we present the definitions of both short memory and piecewise differentiation. For the short memory case, the idea has already been discussed; for example a paper published by Deng in 2007 has already discussed the short memory principle [11], which has also been called the fixed memory principle and logarithmic memory principle. Wu et al. [9] presented the concept of a fractional variable-order derivative where the fractional order changes within an interval. The suggested definition is given below as:
{Ct0Dα0ty(t)=f(y,t) for t∈[t0,t1],Ct1Dα1ty(t)=f(y,t) for t∈[t1,t2],Ct2Dα2ty(t)=f(y,t) for t∈[t2,t3]. | (3.1) |
Here Caputo power law derivative is used, which is known to have a singularity at the origin for a class of functions. The author did not give explicitly space of the functions as the derivative was defined in general, therefore, if we assume a class of the functions for which dydt is continuous then at each t=ti, f(y,t) should be zero.
On the other hand, the piecewise concept is defined as follows.
1) A piecewise derivative of f with classical, power-law and stochastic processes is given by
{Dy(t)=f(t,y(t))if0<t≤t1,Ct1Dαty(t)=f(t,y(t))ift1<t≤t2,dy(t)=f(t,y(t))dt+σy(t)dB(t)ift2<t≤t3. | (3.2) |
2) A piecewise derivative of f with power, exponential and Mittag-Leffler laws is given as
{C0Dαty(t)=f(t,y(t))if0<t≤t1,CFt1Dαty(t)=f(t,y(t))ift1<t≤t2,ABCt1Dαty(t)=f(t,y(t))ift2<t≤t3. | (3.3) |
Several definitions can be found in [10].
In the next section, we will provide a deep analysis of these concepts.The aim of the section is to present advantages and disadvantages of these two independent concepts. We note that
C0Dαtf(t)=1Γ(1−α)t∫0ddτf(τ)(t−τ)−αdτ, | (3.4) |
CF0Dαtf(t)=11−αt∫0ddτf(τ)exp[−α1−α(t−τ)]dτ, | (3.5) |
ABC0Dαtf(t)=11−αt∫0ddτf(τ)Eα[−α1−α(t−τ)α]dτ. | (3.6) |
Here, we present a deep analysis that will help the readers to see the difference between the two concepts. Let us start with short memory. A deep look inside the short memory concept defined by gives the following:
1) The short memory principle considers a change in constant variable order; however, it uses a single kernel. Indeed, this can be viewed as variable order where the order is changed within shorter intervals. Nonetheless, it describes some process and in the case of Caputo derivation, this process will only describe a power-law process that is, this process will not have crossover behavior.
2) The concept is unable to capture classical processes because the fractional order should change in each interval.
On a serious note, however, if we have f(t,y(t))≠0,∀t∈[0,T]. So at each tj
limt→tjCtjDαty(t)=f(t,y(t))∣t=tj. | (4.1) |
Sincedydt is continuous,
limt→tjCtjDαty(t)=f(tj,y(tj))≠0. | (4.2) |
However the right hand side produces f(t,y(t))≠0, which is a contradiction. It infers that f(tj,y(tj))=0. This may be used to explain the process with a renewal force that follows the power-law process. For example, the trajectory of a flea with a constant jump. There are fewest real world problems that present these behaviors. However, due to the power-law singularity the definition suggested by Wu may have some problems at the boundaries. Nonetheless, as a result of using non-singular kernels, the concept of short memory will be well-posed since the conditions at the boundaries will be well controlled and the renewal processes would be well-posed
On the other hand, however, the concept of piecewise was introduced for different purposes. The following example will give light to the situation. We consider evaluating the velocity of water within a geological formation with fractures. We record the velocity as a function of time. The velocity will obviously be low in the rock's matrix; however as the water reaches the fracture, there will be a crossover behavior because the velocity will suddenly increase. The first part of this process follows behaviors resembling a declining process and, later, an almost constant high velocity. Now if one was to withdraw water from such a geological formation and record the water level, one will observe a fading groundwater level in earlier times; then when water is being taken from the fracture, we observe a steady groundwater level. Thus, there is a crossover behavior from the fading process to long range, which can be captured using an exponential function, then the power law. Therefore, the differential operator able to replicate this process is
{C0Dαth(r,t)=f(t,r,h(r,t))if0<t≤T1,CFT1Dαth(r,t)=f1(t,r,h(r,t))ifT1<t≤T. | (4.3) |
Therefore, one can see a clear difference and objectives of both concepts. Piecewise differential operators are thus conceived to capture processes exhibiting different patterns, or crossover behaviors. Here the order does not change within an interval as changing order does not change the process but only the memory with the same pattern, rather, the kernels change to bring into the mathematical formulation the crossover behaviors by each kernel.
For example, using the piecewise derivative the decay equation
{y′(t)=−λy(t)if0<t≤T1,CT1Dαty(t)=−λy(t)ifT1<t≤T2,dy(t)=−λy(t)dt+σy(t)dB(t)ifT2<t≤T | (4.4) |
which will lead to decay with crossover behaviors. From 0<t<T1, we shall observe a normal decay process. From T1<t<T2, we shall observe power-law decay or the Mittag-Leffler decay. From T2<t<T, we shall observe decay with randomness. On the other hand, with the short memory
{C0Dα1ty(t)=−λy(t)if0<t≤T1,CT1Dα2ty(t)=−λy(t)ifT1<t≤T2,CT2Dα3ty(t)=−λy(t)ifT2<t≤T | (4.5) |
which leads only to a power-law process or the Mittag-Leffler process.
In this section, we shall present clearly the difference between the two concepts by applying them to some problems. We shall start with a simple problem about the decay problem with two intervals.
Example 1. We consider a simple decay model within [0,T1] and [T1,T2]. In the case of short memory, we have
{C0Dα1ty(t)=−λy(t)ift∈[0,T1],CT1Dα2ty(t)=−λy(t)ift∈[T1,T2]. | (5.1) |
In the case of piecewise, we can consider the following
{dy(t)dt=−λy(t)ift∈[0,T1],CT1Dαty(t)=−λy(t)ift∈[T1,T2] | (5.2) |
or
{ABC0Dαty(t)=−λy(t)ift∈[0,T1],dy(t)dt=−λy(t)ift∈[T1,T2] | (5.3) |
or
{CF0Dαty(t)=−λy(t)ift∈[0,T1],CT1Dαty(t)=−λy(t)ift∈[T1,T2]. | (5.4) |
Using the Laplace transform on the above system yields in the case of short memory
{y(t)=y(0)Eα1[−λtα1]ift∈[0,T1],y(t)=y(T1)Eα2[−λ(t−T1)α2]ift∈[T1,T2]. | (5.5) |
In the case of piecewise, we have the following solution
{y(t)=y(0)exp[−λt]ift∈[0,T1],y(t)=y(T1)Eα[−λ(t−T1)α]ift∈[T1,T2] | (5.6) |
or
{y(t)=y(0)ift=0,y(t)=y(0)1+λ(1−α)Eα[−λα1+λ(1−α)tα]bift∈]0,T1],y(t)=y(T1)exp[−λ(t−T1)]ift∈[T1,T2] | (5.7) |
or
{y(t)=y(0)ift=0,y(t)=y(0)1+λ(1−α)exp[−λα1+λ(1−α)tα]bift∈]0,T1],y(t)=y(T1)Eα[−λ(t−T1)α]ift∈[T1,T2]. | (5.8) |
T1=1 where the crossover occurs and T2=2.4 is the final time. The numerical simulations are presented in Figures 1–4 below.
Example 2. We consider the spread of an infectious disease. We consider a Susceptible, Exposed, Infected and Recovered (SEIR) model. It was proven by Atangana and Seda that such a model may not be able to predict waves [12]. Thus to introduce waves, in particular two waves, we consider the spread to be in the periods [0,T1] and [T1,T2]. In the case of short memory, we have
{C0DαtS=μN−μS−βSINC0DαtE=βSIN−(μ+a)EC0DαtI=aE−(γ+μ)IC0DαtR=γI−μRift∈[0,T1],{CT1DβtS=μN−μS−βSINCT1DβtE=βSIN−(μ+a)ECT1DβtI=aE−(γ+μ)ICT1DβtR=γI−μRift∈[T1,T2]. | (5.9) |
In the case of piecewise several scenarios can be obtained. So we can have
{⋅S=μN−μS−βSIN⋅E=βSIN−(μ+a)E⋅I=aE−(γ+μ)I⋅R=γI−μRift∈[0,T1],{dS=(μN−μS−βSIN)dt+σ1SdB1(t)dE=(βSIN−(μ+a)E)dt+σ2EdB2(t)dI=(aE−(γ+μ)I)dt+σ3IdB3(t)dR=(γI−μR)dt+σ4RdB4(t)ift∈[T1,T2] | (5.10) |
or
{dS=(μN−μS−βSIN)dt+σ1SdB1(t)dE=(βSIN−(μ+a)E)dt+σ2EdB2(t)dI=(aE−(γ+μ)I)dt+σ3IdB3(t)dR=(γI−μR)dt+σ4RdB4(t)ift∈[0,T1],{CT1DαtS=μN−μS−βSINCT1DαtE=βSIN−(μ+a)ECT1DαtI=aE−(γ+μ)ICT1DαtR=γI−μRift∈[T1,T2]. | (5.11) |
Noting that several more scenarios can be considered, however, we will only consider these two in the case of piecewise. Before proceeding with the analysis of these models, we shall first provide an interpolation of each case in terms of wave behaviors. In the case of short memory, the first and second waves show the non-Gaussian distribution associated to the power-law variables t−α1 and t−α2. Therefore, one will observe different long tails for t−α1 and t−α2. On the other hand, however, the first considered model shows that the first wave has a normal distribution, while the second wave has random behavior. The second model shows that the first wave has a long tail spread while the second has random behavior.
We now present the numerical solutions of the considered models. We shall consider the numerical scheme suggested by Ghanbari et al. [13] for fractional cases. The short memory case can be simplified to
{C0Dαtyi(t)=Fi(t,yi(t))ift∈[0,T1],CT1Dβtyi(t)=Fi(t,yi(t))ift∈[T1,T2]. | (5.12) |
Applying the Ghanbari method yields
{yn1i=yi(0)+hα(˜a(α)n1Fi(t0,yi(t0))+n1∑k=2˜a(α)n1−kFi(tk,yi(tk)))ift∈[0,T1],yn2i=yi(T1)+hβ(˜a(β)n2Fi(T1,yi(T1))+n2∑j=n1+2a(β)n2−jFi(tj,yi(tj)))ift∈[T1,T2] | (5.13) |
where
˜a(α)n1=(n1−1)α+1−nα1(n1−α−1)Γ(α+2),a(β)n2={1Γ(β+2)ifn=0,(n2−1)β+1−2nβ+12+(n2+1)β+1Γ(β+2)ifn≥1. | (5.14) |
and
˜a(β)n2=(n2−1)β+1−nβ2(n2−β−1)Γ(β+2),θ(β)k=(k−1)β+1−2kβ+1+(k+1)β+1Γ(β+2) if k=n1+1,,..,n2−1. | (5.15) |
In the case of the piecewise first model, we have
{yn1i=yi(0)+∑n1j=2[2312Fi(tj,yi(tj))Δt−43Fi(tj−1,yi(tj−1))Δt+512Fi(tj−2,yi(tj−2))Δt] if t∈[0,T1],{yn2i=y(T1)+∑n2j=n1+3[2312Fi(tj,yi(tj))Δt−43Fi(tj−1,yi(tj−1))Δt+512Fi(tj−2,yi(tj−2))Δt] if t∈[T1,T2].+σiyi(Bn2+1i−Bn2i) | (5.16) |
For Case 2, we obtain
{{yn1i=yi(0)+∑n1j=2[2312Fi(tj,yi(tj))Δt−43Fi(tj−1,yi(tj−1))Δt+512Fi(tj−2,yi(tj−2))Δt]+σi∑n1j=1yj(Bji−Bj−1i)ift∈[0,T1],yn2i=yi(T1)+hα(˜a(α)n1Fi(tn1,yi(tn1))+∑n2k=0˜a(α)n1+kFi(tk,yi(tk)))ift∈[T1,T2]. | (5.17) |
The numerical solutions for short memory are depicted in Figure 5 with the following parameters
N=1000,μ=0.01,β=0.6,a=0.2,γ=0.03, | (5.18) |
and the following initial conditions
S(0)=1000,E(0)=25,I(50)=22,R(50)=5,S(50)=39E(50)=67,I(50)=505,R(50)=390 | (5.19) |
The numerical solutions for Cases 1 and 2 are respectively depicted in Figures 6 and 7 with the following parameters
N=1000,μ=0.01,β=0.6,a=0.2,γ=0.03, | (5.20) |
and the following initial conditions
S(0)=1000,E(0)=25,I(50)=22,R(50)=5,S(50)=35E(50)=44,I(50)=424,R(50)=527,α=0.7 | (5.21) |
Figure 5 demonstrates the short memory effect, where the first and second parts present different long tails behaviors characterized by α1 and α2; however, both clearly depict the same process which is the power law process. On the other hand, Figures 6 and 7 show the clear effects of the piecewise differential operators; the first part in Figure 6 shows normal distribution, which is characteristic of the classical differential operator, while the second part clearly shows the effect of randomness. The complete model therefore shows crossover behavior from deterministic to stochastic with no steady state. In Figure 6, the process is different. We start with randomness then end up with long tail behaviors as a result of the power law kernel.
Example 3. We now consider a chaotic problem in particular the 8-wing attractor [14]. This model has been studied by several researchers [15], the model is given as
⋅x=a(y−x)+f(t)yz⋅y=cx+dy−xz⋅z=−bz+xy | (5.22) |
where the function f(t)=M sgn(sin(wt))+K. The constant w is known to be a switch frequency and M and K are constant parameters.
In the case of short memory, we have
{C0Dα1tx=a(y−x)+f(t)yzC0Dα1ty=cx+dy−xzC0Dα1tz=−bz+xyift∈[0,T1],{CT1Dα2tx=a(y−x)+f(t)yzCT1Dα2ty=cx+dy−xzCT1Dα2tz=−bz+xyift∈[T1,T2]. | (5.23) |
In the case of piecewise, we can consider three cases. For Case 1, we can write
{ABC0Dαtx=a(y−x)+f(t)yzABC0Dαty=cx+dy−xzABC0Dαtz=−bz+xyift∈[0,T1],{dx=(a(y−x)+f(t)yz)dt+σ1xdB1(t)dy=(cx+dy−xz)dt+σ2ydB2(t)dz=(−bz+xy)dt+σ3zdB3(t)ift∈[T1,T2]. | (5.24) |
For Case 2, we have
{C0Dαtx=a(y−x)+f(t)yzC0Dαty=cx+dy−xzC0Dαtz=−bz+xyift∈[0,T1],{dx=(a(y−x)+f(t)yz)dt+σ1xdB1(t)dy=(cx+dy−xz)dt+σ2ydB2(t)dz=(−bz+xy)dt+σ3zdB3(t)ift∈[T1,T2]. | (5.25) |
For Case 3, we can get
{⋅x=a(y−x)+f(t)yz⋅y=cx+dy−xz⋅z=−bz+xyift∈[0,T1],{dx=(a(y−x)+f(t)yz)dt+σ1xdB1(t)dy=(cx+dy−xz)dt+σ2ydB2(t)dz=(−bz+xy)dt+σ3zdB3(t)ift∈[T1,T2]. | (5.26) |
We shall now present the numerical solution of each case. In the case of short memory, one can use the numerical method based on Lagrange interpolation [16]. We can first simplify the model as follows.
{C0Dα1tMi(t)=Π(t,Mi(t))ift∈[0,T1],CT1Dα2tMi(t)=Π(t,Mi(t))ift∈[T1,T2]. | (5.27) |
Thus, applying such method to the above system yields
{Mn1i=Mi(0)+[(Δt)α1Γ(α1+2)n1∑q=0Π(tq,Mqi)×[(n1−q+1)α1(n1−q+2+α1)−(n1−q)α1(n1−q+2+2α1)]−(Δt)α1Γ(α1+2)n1∑q=1Π(tq−1,Mq−1i)×[(n1−q+1)α1+1−(n1−q)α1(n1−q+1+α1)]]ift∈[0,T1],Mn2i=Mi(T1)+[(Δt)α2Γ(α2+2)n2∑k=n1+1Π(tk,Mki)×[(n2−q+1)α2(n2−q+2+α2)−(n2−q)α2(n2−q+2+2α2)]−(Δt)α2Γ(α2+2)n2∑k=n1+2Π(tk−1,Mk−1i)×[(n2−q+1)α2+1−(n2−q)α2(n2−q+1+α2)]]ift∈[T1,T2]. | (5.28) |
With the piecewise case, we obtain the following numerical solution by using a scheme based on Newton polynomial interpolation [17]. Also, we simplify the model as follows.
{ABC0Dα1tMi(t)=Π(t,Mi(t))ift∈[0,T1],dMi(t)=Π(t,Mi(t))dt+σiMidBi(t)ift∈[T1,T2]. | (5.29) |
Then applying this method yields
Mn1i=Mi(0)+1−αAB(α)Π(tn1,Mn1i)+α(Δt)αAB(α)Γ(α+1)n1∑k=2Π(tk−2,Mk−2i)×{(n1−k+1)α−(n1−k)α}+α(Δt)αAB(α)Γ(α+2)n1∑k=2[Π(tk−1,Mk−1i)−Π(tk−2,Mk−2i)]×{(n1−k+1)α(n1−k+3+2α)−(n1−k)α(n1−k+3+3α)}+α(Δt)α2AB(α)Γ(α+3)n1∑k=2[Π(tk,Mki)−2Π(tk−1,Mk−1i)+Π(tk−2,Mk−2i)]×{(n1−k+1)α[2(n1−k)2+(3α+10)(n1−k)+2α2+9α+12]−(n1−k)α[2(n1−k)2+(5α+10)(n1−k)+6α2+18α+12]},0≤t≤T1Mn2+4i=Mn2+3i+n3∑j3=n1+3[2312Π(tn2+3,Mn2+3i)−43Π(tn2+2,Mn2+2i)+512Π(tn2+1,Mn2+1i)]Δt+σiMn2i(Bn2+1i−Bn2+1i),T1≤t≤T2 | (5.30) |
For Case 2, we again apply the scheme with the Newton polynomial to obtain
{Mn1i=Mi(0)+(Δt)αΓ(α+1)n1∑k=2Π(tk−2,Mk−2i)×{(n1−k+1)α−(n1−k)α}+(Δt)αΓ(α+2)n1∑k=2[Π(tk−1,Mk−1i)−Π(tk−2,Mk−2i)],×{(n1−k+1)α(n1−k+3+2α)−(n1−k)α(n1−k+3+3α)}+(Δt)α2Γ(α+3)n1∑k=2[Π(tk,Mki)−2Π(tk−1,Mk−1i)+Π(tk−2,Mk−2i)]×{(n1−k+1)α[2(n1−k)2+(3α+10)(n1−k)+2α2+9α+12]−(n1−k)α[2(n1−k)2+(5α+10)(n1−k)+6α2+18α+12]},0≤t≤T1Mn2+4i=Mn2+3i+n3∑j3=n2+3[2312Π(tn2+3,Mn2+3i)−43Π(tn2+2,Mn2+2i)+512Π(tn2+1,Mn2+1i)]Δt+σiMi(Cn2)(Bn2+1i−Bn2+1i),T1≤t≤T2 | (5.31) |
where Cn2∈[tn2+4,tn2+3]. For Case 3, we use the simple Adams-Bashforth methods as follows
{Mn2+3i=Mn2+2i+[2312Π(tn2+2,Mn2+2i)−43Π(tn2+1,Mn2+1i)+512Π(tn2,Mn2i)]Δt,0≤t≤T1Mn2+4i=Mn2+3i+[2312Π(tn2+3,Mn2+3i)−43Π(tn2+2,Mn2+2i)+512Π(tn2+1,Mn2+1i)]Δt+σiMi(Cn2)(Bn2+1i−Bn2i),T1≤t≤T2 | (5.32) |
where Cn2∈[tn2+4,tn2+3].
Numerical solutions are obtained for the following parameters
a=14,b=43,c=−1,d=16,M=9,K=10,w=2π50. | (5.33) |
The numerical solutions for short memory are depicted in Figure 8 for the initial data x(0)=22.3,y(0)=4.9 and z(0)=2.6.
For piecewise, we consider the following stochastic-deterministic problem with power-law and Mittag-Leffler kernels:
{C0Dαtx=a(y−x)+f(t)yz+σ1xB′1(t)C0Dαty=cx+dy−xz+σ2yB′2(t)C0Dαtz=−bz+xy+σ3zB′3(t)ift∈[0,T1],{ABCT1Dαtx=a(y−x)+f(t)yzABCT1Dαty=cx+dy−xzABCT1Dαtz=−bz+xyift∈[T1,T2] | (5.34) |
with the stochastic constants
σ1=0.031;σ2=0.035;σ3=0.032. | (5.35) |
The numerical simulation for such a problem can be performed as illustrated in Figure 9 by using the same initial data and parameters.
For piecewise, we consider the following stochastic-deterministic problem with power-law and Mittag-Leffler kernels:
{ABC0Dαtx=a(y−x)+f(t)yz+σ1xB′1(t)ABC0Dαty=cx+dy−xz+σ2yB′2(t)ABC0Dαtz=−bz+xy+σ3zB′3(t)ift∈[0,T1],{CT1Dαtx=a(y−x)+f(t)yzCT1Dαty=cx+dy−xzCT1Dαtz=−bz+xyift∈[T1,T2] | (5.36) |
with the following stochastic constants
σ1=0.031;σ2=0.035;σ3=0.032. | (5.37) |
The numerical simulation for such a problem can be performed as shown in Figure 10 by using the same initial data and parameters.
Also, we consider the following deterministic-stochastic problem with power-law and Mittag-Leffler kernels:
{C0Dαtx=a(y−x)+f(t)yzC0Dαty=cx+dy−xzC0Dαtz=−bz+xyift∈[0,T1],{ABCT1Dαtx=a(y−x)+f(t)yz+σ1xB′1(t)ABCT1Dαty=cx+dy−xz+σ2yB′2(t)ABCT1Dαtz=−bz+xy+σ3zB′3(t)ift∈[T1,T2] | (5.38) |
with the following stochastic constants:
σ1=0.02;σ2=0.012;σ3=0.021. | (5.39) |
The numerical solutions for the above problem can be depicted as shown in Figure 11 using same initial data and parameters.
Figure 7 shows the results obtained by applying the power-law short memory concept. To show the difference within the interval, we have opted to consider the first part of the interval to be in blue and the second to be in red. However, a quick look at the results shows clearly the effect of a power law, no great change from one interval to another is observed since both depict long-tail behaviors as results of the power-law kernel. In this case, there is no crossover behavior, just a repetition of different long tail behaviors. On the other hand, in Figures 8 and 9, there is a clear change in patterns where the first patterns show deterministic behaviors in particular, long-tails due to power law in Figure 8, and the second part shows randomness, there is, therefore, a clear crossover from power law to randomness. While, in Figure 9, we have two crossovers, the first is due to the Mittag-Leffler kernel that shows a change from stretched exponential to power law and the second is stochastic.
Also, we consider deterministic-stochastic problem with power-law and Mittag-Leffler kernel
{ABC0Dαtx=a(y−x)+f(t)yzABC0Dαty=cx+dy−xzABC0Dαtz=−bz+xyift∈[0,T1],{CT1Dαtx=a(y−x)+f(t)yz+σ1xB′1(t)CT1Dαty=cx+dy−xz+σ2yB′2(t)CT1Dαtz=−bz+xy+σ3zB′3(t)ift∈[T1,T2] | (5.40) |
with the following stochastic constants:
σ1=0.02;σ2=0.012;σ3=0.021. | (5.41) |
The numerical solutions for the above problem can be depicted as shown in Figure 12 by using the same initial data and parameters.
In the last decades, researchers have devoted their attention to better understanding complex realworld problems even on a small scale. They have therefore developed several methods, different differential, and integral operators. To understand the process by which different long tails occur in different intervals, the concept of short memory was introduced. This concept defines power-law derivatives in different intervals and each interval has its own order. This order accounts for the long tail associated with that interval. However, the process is scale-invariant in terms of patterns. On the other hand, because there are many real-world problems that exhibit passages from one process to another, for example, a passage from power law to randomness, the concept of piecewise was introduced. In this work, a detailed analysis was given to show their different fields of applications and show also, when short memory and piecewise concepts can be applied. This paper thus helps researchers to identify what problem is suitable for short memory and piecewise.
The authors declare there is no conflict of interest.
[1] | Eriksson E, Lysell J, Larsson H, et al. (2019) Geometric flow control lateral flow immunoassay devices (GFC-LFIDs): a new dimension to enhance analytical performance. Research . https://doi.org/10.34133/2019/8079561 |
[2] |
Peeling RW, Wedderburn CJ, Garcia PJ, et al. (2020) Serology testing in the COVID-19 pandemic response. Lancet Infect Dis 20: e245-e249. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1473-3099(20)30517-X ![]() |
[3] | Mathieu E, Ritchie H, Rodés-Guirao L, et al. Coronavirus Pandemic (COVID-19) (2020). Available from: https://ourworldindata.org/coronavirus |
[4] | World Health OrganizationDiagnostic testing for SARS-CoV-2 (2020). Available from: https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/diagnostic-testing-for-sars-cov-2 |
[5] | (2022) European Centre for Disease Prevention and ControlConsiderations for the use of antibody tests for SARSCoV-2 – first update. Stockholm: ECDC. |
[6] | Chisale MRO, Ramazanu S, Mwale SE, et al. (2022) Seroprevalence of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in Africa: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Rev Med Virol 32: e2271. https://doi.org/10.1002/rmv.2271 |
[7] |
Mirica AC, Stan D, Chelcea IC, et al. (2022) Latest trends in lateral flow immunoassay (LFIA) detection labels and conjugation process. Front Bioeng Biotechnol 14: 922772. https://doi.org/10.3389/fbioe.2022.922772 ![]() |
[8] |
Kosack CS, Page AL, Klatser PR, et al. (2017) A guide to aid the selection of diagnostic tests. Bull World Health Organ 95: 639-645. https://doi.org/10.2471/BLT.16.187468 ![]() |
[9] |
Kumar M, Iyer SS (2021) ASSURED-SQVM diagnostics for COVID-19: addressing the why, when, where, who, what and how of testing. Expert Rev Mol Diagn 21: 349-362. https://doi.org/10.1080/14737159.2021.1902311 ![]() |
[10] |
Azkur AK, Akdis M, Azkur D, et al. (2020) Immune response to SARS-CoV-2 and mechanisms of immunopathological changes in COVID-19. Allergy 75: 1564-1581. https://doi.org/10.1111/all.14364 ![]() |
[11] |
Guo L, Ren L, Yang S, et al. (2020) Profiling early humoral response to diagnose novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19). Clin Infect Dis 28: 778-785. https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/ciaa310 ![]() |
[12] |
Wang Y, Zhang L, Sang L, et al. (2020) Kinetics of viral load and antibody response in relation to COVID-19 severity. J Clin Invest 130: 5235-5244. https://doi.org/10.1172/JCI138759 ![]() |
[13] |
Herroelen PH, Martens GA, De Smet D, et al. (2020) Humoral immune response to SARS-CoV-2. Am J Clin Pathol 154: 610-619. https://doi.org/10.1093/ajcp/aqaa140 ![]() |
[14] |
Huang AT, Garcia-Carreras B, Hitchings MDT, et al. (2020) A systematic review of antibody mediated immunity to coronaviruses: kinetics, correlates of protection, and association with severity. Nat Commun 11: 4704. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-18450-4 ![]() |
[15] |
Spicuzza L, Montineri A, Manuele R, et al. (2020) Reliability and usefulness of a rapid IgM-IgG antibody test for the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection: a preliminary report. J Infect 81: e53-e54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jinf.2020.04.022 ![]() |
[16] |
Padoan A, Sciacovelli L, Basso D (2020) IgA-Ab response to spike glycoprotein of SARS-CoV-2 in patients with COVID-19: A longitudinal study. Clin Chim Acta 507: 164-166. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cca.2020.04.026 ![]() |
[17] |
Zhang Y, Chai Y, Hu Z, et al. (2022) Recent progress on rapid lateral flow assay-based early diagnosis of COVID-19. Front Bioeng Biotechnol 10: 866368. https://doi.org/10.3389/fbioe.2022.866368 ![]() |
[18] |
Vabret N, Britton GJ, Gruber C, et al. (2020) Immunology of COVID-19: current state of the science. Immunity 52: 910-941. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.immuni.2020.05.002 ![]() |
[19] |
Zhao J, Yuan Q, Wang H, et al. (2020) Antibody responses to SARS-CoV-2 in patients of novel coronavirus disease 2019. Clin Infect Dis 71: 2027-2034. https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/ciaa344 ![]() |
[20] |
Martín J, Tena N, Asuero AG, et al. (2021) Current state of diagnostic, screening and surveillance testing methods for COVID-19 from an analytical chemistry point of view. Microchem J 167: 106305. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.microc.2021.106305 ![]() |
[21] |
Al-Tamimi M, Tarifi AA, Qaqish A, et al. (2023) Immunoglobulins response of COVID-19 patients, COVID-19 vaccine recipients, and random individuals. PLoS One 18: e0281689. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0281689 ![]() |
[22] |
Zhang S, Xu K, Li C, et al. (2022) Long-term kinetics of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies and impact of inactivated vaccine on SARS-CoV-2 antibodies based on a COVID-19 patients cohort. Front Immunol 13: 829665. https://doi.org/10.3389/fimmu.2022.829665 ![]() |
[23] |
Liang Y, Wang ML, Chien CS, et al. (2020) Highlight of immune pathogenic response and hematopathologic effect in SARS-CoV, MERS-CoV, and SARS-Cov-2 infection. Front Immunol 11: 1022. https://doi.org/10.3389/fimmu.2020.01022 ![]() |
[24] |
Irani S (2022) Immune responses in SARS-CoV-2, SARS-CoV, and MERS-CoV infections: a comparative review. Int J Prev Med 13: 45. https://doi.org/10.4103/ijpvm.IJPVM_429_20 ![]() |
[25] |
Chiereghin A, Zagari RM, Galli S, et al. (2021) Recent advances in the evaluation of serological assays for the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19. Front Public Health 8: 620222. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2020.620222 ![]() |
[26] |
Vengesai A, Midzi H, Kasambala M, et al. (2021) A systematic and meta-analysis review on the diagnostic accuracy of antibodies in the serological diagnosis of COVID-19. Syst Rev 10: 155. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-021-01689-3 ![]() |
[27] |
Wang MY, Zhao R, Gao LJ, et al. (2020) Structure, biology, and structure-based therapeutics development. Front Cell Infect Microbiol 10: 587269. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcimb.2020.587269 ![]() |
[28] | Rak A, Donina S, Zabrodskaya Y, et al. (2022) Cross-reactivity of SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid-binding antibodies and its implication for COVID-19 serology tests. Viruses 14. https://doi.org/10.3390/v14092041 |
[29] |
Wang JJ, Zhang N, Richardson SA, et al. (2021) Rapid lateral flow tests for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibodies. Expert Rev Mol Diagn 21: 363-370. https://doi.org/10.1080/14737159.2021.1913123 ![]() |
[30] |
Jalkanen P, Pasternack A, Maljanen S, et al. (2021) A combination of N and S antigens with IgA and IgG measurement strengthens the accuracy of SARS-CoV-2 serodiagnostics. J Infect Dis 224: 218-228. https://doi.org/10.1093/infdis/jiab222 ![]() |
[31] |
Gong F, Wei HX, Li Q, et al. (2021) Evaluation and comparison of serological methods for COVID-19 diagnosis. Front Mol Biosci 8: 682405. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmolb.2021.682405 ![]() |
[32] |
Yadegari H, Mohammadi M, Maghsood F, et al. (2023) Diagnostic performance of a novel antigen-capture ELISA for the detection of SARS-CoV-2. Anal Biochem 666: 115079. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ab.2023.115079 ![]() |
[33] |
Guarino C, Larson E, Babasyan S, et al. (2022) Development of a quantitative COVID-19 multiplex assay and its use for serological surveillance in a low SARS-CoV-2 incidence community. PLoS One 17: e0262868. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0262868 ![]() |
[34] |
Amanat F, Stadlbauer D, Strohmeier S, et al. (2020) A serological assay to detect SARS-CoV-2 seroconversion in humans. Nature Medicine 26: 1033-1036. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41591-020-0913-5 ![]() |
[35] |
Ravi N, Cortade DL, Ng E, et al. (2020) Diagnostics for SARS-CoV-2 detection: a comprehensive review of the FDA-EUA COVID-19 testing landscape. Biosens Bioelectron 165: 112454. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bios.2020.112454 ![]() |
[36] |
Okba NMA, Müller MA, Li W, et al. (2020) Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2-specific antibody responses in coronavirus disease patients. Emerg Infect Dis 26: 1478-1488. https://doi.org/10.3201/eid2607.200841 ![]() |
[37] |
Ghaffari A, Meurant R, Ardakani A (2021) COVID-19 point-of-care diagnostics that satisfy global target product profiles. Diagnostics (Basel) 11: 115. https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics11010115 ![]() |
[38] |
Li Z, Yi Y, Luo X, et al. (2020) Development and clinical application of a rapid IgM-IgG combined antibody test for SARS-CoV-2 infection diagnosis. J Med Virol 92: 1518-1524. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmv.25727 ![]() |
[39] |
Andryukov BG (2020) Six decades of lateral flow immunoassay: from determining metabolic markers to diagnosing COVID-19. AIMS Microbiol 6: 280-304. https://doi.org/10.3934/microbiol.2020018 ![]() |
[40] |
Ernst E, Wolfe P, Stahura C, et al. (2021) Technical considerations to development of serological tests for SARS-CoV-2. Talanta 224. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.talanta.2020.121883 ![]() |
[41] |
Koczula KM, Gallotta A (2016) Lateral flow assays. Essays Biochem 60: 111-120. https://doi.org/10.1042/EBC20150012 ![]() |
[42] | U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Coronavirus (COVID-19) Update: FDA Authorizes First Point-of-Care Antibody Test for COVID-19 (2020). Available from: https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/coronavirus-covid-19-update-fda-authorizes-first-point-care-antibody-test-covid-19 |
[43] |
Jazayeri MH, Amani H, Pourfatollah AA, et al. (2016) Various methods of gold nanoparticles (GNPs) conjugation to antibodies. Sens Bio-Sens Res 9: 17-22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbsr.2016.04.002 ![]() |
[44] |
O'Farrell B (2013) Lateral flow immunoassay systems: evolution from the current state of the art to the next generation of highly sensitive, quantitative rapid assays. The Immunoassay Handbook.Elsevier 89-107. ![]() |
[45] |
Albaz AA, Rafeeq MM, Sain ZM, et al. (2021) Nanotechnology-based approaches in the fight against SARS-CoV-2. AIMS Microbiol 7: 368-398. https://doi.org/10.3934/microbiol.2021023 ![]() |
[46] |
Hsiao WW, Le TN, Pham DM, et al. (2021) Recent advances in novel lateral flow technologies for detection of COVID-19. Biosensors (Basel) 11: 295. https://doi.org/10.3390/bios11090295 ![]() |
[47] | Karuppaiah G, Vashist A, Nair M, et al. (2023) Emerging trends in point-of-care biosensing strategies for molecular architectures and antibodies of SARS-CoV-2. Biosens Bioelectron X 13: 100324. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biosx.2023.100324 |
[48] |
Huang C, Wen T, Shi FJ, et al. (2020) Rapid detection of IgM antibodies against the SARS-CoV-2 virus via colloidal gold nanoparticle-based lateral-flow assay. ACS Omega 5: 12550-12556. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsomega.0c01554 ![]() |
[49] |
Zhang JJY, Lee KS, Ong CW, et al. (2021) Diagnostic performance of COVID-19 serological assays during early infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis of 11516 samples. Influenza Other Respir Viruses 15: 529-538. https://doi.org/10.1111/irv.12841 ![]() |
[50] |
Tessaro L, Aquino A, Panzenhagen P, et al. (2023) A systematic review of the advancement on colorimetric nanobiosensors for SARS-CoV-2 detection. J Pharm Biomed Anal 222: 15087. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpba.2022.115087 ![]() |
[51] |
Rabiee N, Ahmadi S, Soufi GJ, et al. (2022) Quantum dots against SARS-CoV-2: diagnostic and therapeutic potentials. J Chem Technol Biotechnol 97: 1640-1654. https://doi.org/10.1002/jctb.7036 ![]() |
[52] |
Wang C, Yang X, Gu B, et al. (2020) Sensitive and simultaneous detection of SARSCoV-2-specific IgM/IgG using lateral flow immunoassay based on dual-mode quantum dot nanobeads. Anal Chem 92: 15542-15549. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.analchem.0c03484 ![]() |
[53] |
Seo SE, Ryu E, Kim J, et al. (2023) Fluorophore-encapsulated nanobeads for on-site, rapid, and sensitive lateral flow assay. Sens Actuators B Chem 381: 133364. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.snb.2023.133364 ![]() |
[54] |
Budd J, Miller BS, Weckman NE, et al. (2023) Lateral flow test engineering and lessons learned from COVID-19. Nat Rev Bioeng 1: 13-31. https://doi.org/10.1038/s44222-022-00007-3 ![]() |
[55] | Chen PY, Ko CH, Wang CJ, et al. (2021) The early detection of immunoglobulins via optical-based lateral flow immunoassay platform in COVID-19 pandemic. PLoS One 16. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0254486 |
[56] |
Pieri M, Nicolai E, Nuccetelli M, et al. (2022) Validation of a quantitative lateral flow immunoassay (LFIA)-based point-of-care (POC) rapid test for SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibodies. Arch Virol 167: 1285-1291. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00705-022-05422-w ![]() |
[57] |
Castrejón-Jiménez NS, García-Pérez BE, Reyes-Rodríguez NE, et al. (2022) Challenges in the detection of SARS-CoV-2: evolution of the lateral flow immunoassay as a valuable tool for viral diagnosis. Biosensors (Basel) 12: 728. https://doi.org/10.3390/bios12090728 ![]() |
[58] |
Burbelo PD, Riedo FX, Morishima C, et al. (2020) Sensitivity in detection of antibodies to nucleocapsid and spike proteins of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 in patients with coronavirus disease 2019. J Infect Dis 222: 206-213. https://doi.org/10.1093/infdis/jiaa273 ![]() |
[59] |
Ang GY, Chan KG, Yean CY, et al. (2022) Lateral flow immunoassays for SARS-CoV-2. Diagnostics (Basel) 12: 2854. https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics12112854 ![]() |
[60] |
Smits VAJ, Hernández-Carralero E, Paz-Cabrera MC, et al. (2021) The Nucleocapsid protein triggers the main humoral immune response in COVID-19 patients. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 543: 45-49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbrc.2021.01.073 ![]() |
[61] |
Owen SI, Williams CT, Garrod G, et al. (2022) Twelve lateral flow immunoassays (LFAs) to detect SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. J Infect 84: 355-360. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jinf.2021.12.007 ![]() |
[62] |
Barnes CO, Jette CA, Abernathy ME, et al. (2020) SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibody structures inform therapeutic strategies. Nature 588: 682-687. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-020-2852-1 ![]() |
[63] |
McCallum M, Marco AD, Lempp F, et al. (2021) N-terminal domain antigenic mapping reveals a site of vulnerability for SARS-CoV-2. Cell 184: 2332-2347. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2021.03.028 ![]() |
[64] |
Piccoli L, Park YJ, Tortorici MA, et al. (2020) Mapping neutralizing and immunodominant sites on the SARS-CoV-2 spike receptor-binding domain by structure-guided high-resolution serology. Cell 183: 1024-1042. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2020.09.037 ![]() |
[65] |
Khoury DS, Cromer D, Reynaldi A, et al. (2022) Neutralizing antibody levels are highly predictive of immune protection from symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection. Nat Med 27: 1205-1211. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41591-021-01377-8 ![]() |
[66] |
Post N, Eddy D, Huntley C, et al. (2020) Antibo1dy response to SARS-CoV-2 infection in humans: a systematic review. PLoS One 15: e0244126. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0244126 ![]() |
[67] |
Kim Y, Bae JY, Kwon K, et al. (2022) Kinetics of neutralizing antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 infection according to sex, age, and disease severity. Sci Rep 12: 13491. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-17605-1 ![]() |
[68] |
Lau EHY, Tsang OTY, Hui DSC, et al. (2021) Neutralizing antibody titres in SARS-CoV-2 infections. Nat Commun 12: 63. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-20247-4 ![]() |
[69] |
Park JH, Cha MJ, Choi H, et al. (2022) Relationship between SARS-CoV-2 antibody titer and the severity of COVID-19. J Microbiol Immunol Infect 55: 1094-1100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmii.2022.04.005 ![]() |
[70] |
Tuyji Tok Y, Can Sarinoglu R, Ordekci S, et al. (2023) One-year post-vaccination longitudinal follow-up of quantitative SARS-CoV-2 anti-spike total antibodies in health care professionals and evaluation of correlation with surrogate neutralization test. Vaccines (Basel) 11: 355. https://doi.org/10.3390/vaccines11020355 ![]() |
[71] |
Vidal SJ, Collier AY, Yu J, et al. (2021) Correlates of neutralization against SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern by early pandemic sera. J Virol 95: e0040421. https://doi.org/10.1128/JVI.00404-21 ![]() |
[72] |
Chen Y, Zhao X, Zhou H, et al. (2023) Broadly neutralizing antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 and other human coronaviruses. Nat Rev Immunol 23: 189-199. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41577-022-00784-3 ![]() |
[73] | Suthar MS, Zimmerman M, Kauffman R, et al. (2020) Rapid generation of neutralizing antibody responses in COVID-19 patients. Cell Rep Med 1. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.xcrm.2020.100040 |
[74] |
Carter LJ, Garner LV, Smoot JW, et al. (2020) Assay techniques and test development for COVID-19 diagnosis. ACS Cent Sci 6: 591-605. https://doi.org/10.1021/acscentsci.0c00501 ![]() |
[75] | Crawford KHD, Eguia R, Dingens AS, et al. (2020) Protocol and reagents for pseudotyping lentiviral particles with SARS-CoV-2 spike protein for neutralization assays. Viruses 12. https://doi.org/10.3390/v12050513 |
[76] | Hamid S, Tali S, Leblanc JJ, et al. (2021) Tools and techniques for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)/COVID-19 detection. Clin Microbiol Rev 34. https://doi.org/10.1128/CMR.00228-20 |
[77] |
Liu KT, Han YJ, Wu GH, et al. (2022) Overview of neutralization assays and international standard for detecting SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibody. Viruses 14: 1560. https://doi.org/10.3390/v14071560 ![]() |
[78] | The Global Fund, List of SARS-CoV-2 Diagnostic test kits and equipments eligible for procurement according to Board Decision on Additional Support for Country Responses to COVID-19 (GF/B42/EDP11) (2023). Available from: https://www.theglobalfund.org/media/9629/covid19_diagnosticproducts_list_en.pdf |
[79] | Foundation for Innovative New Diagnostics, COVID-19 test directory. Available from: https://www.finddx.org/tools-and-resources/dxconnect/test-directories/covid-19-test-directory/ |
[80] |
Ochola L, Ogongo P, Mungai S, et al. (2022) Performance Evaluation of Lateral Flow Assays for Coronavirus Disease-19 Serology. Clin Lab Med 42: 31-56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cll.2021.10.005 ![]() |
[81] |
Filchakova O, Dossym D, Ilyas A, et al. (2022) Review of COVID-19 testing and diagnostic methods. Talanta 244: 123409. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.talanta.2022.123409 ![]() |
[82] |
Deshpande PS, Abraham IE, Pitamberwale A, et al. (2022) Review of clinical performance of serology based commercial diagnostic assays for detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 antibodies. Viral Immunol 35: 82-111. https://doi.org/10.1089/vim.2020.0313 ![]() |
[83] |
Wang Z, Zheng Z, Hu H, et al. (2020) A point-of-care selenium nanoparticle-based test for the combined detection of anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgM and IgG in human serum and blood. Lab Chip 20: 4255-4261. https://doi.org/10.1039/d0lc00828a ![]() |
[84] | Bastos M, Tavaziva G, Abidi S, et al. (2020) Diagnostic accuracy of serological tests for covid-19: systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ . https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.m2516 |
[85] |
Novello S, Terzolo M, Paola B, et al. (2021) Humoral immune response to SARS-CoV-2 in five different groups of individuals at different environmental and professional risk of infection. Sci Rep 11: 24503. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-04279-4 ![]() |
[86] | Deeks JJ, Dinnes J, Takwoingi Y, et al. (2020) Antibody tests for identification of current and past infection with SARS-CoV-2. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 6: CD013652. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD013652 |
[87] |
Pecoraro V, Negro A, Pirotti T, et al. (2022) Estimate false-negative RT-PCR rates for SARS-CoV-2. A systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Clin Invest 52: e13706. https://doi.org/10.1111/eci.13706 ![]() |
[88] |
Ozturk A, Bozok T, Bozok TS, et al. (2021) Evaluation of rapid antibody test and chest computed tomography results of COVID-19 patients: A retrospective study. J Med Virol 93: 6582-6587. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmv.27209 ![]() |
[89] |
Yurtsever I, Karatoprak C, Sumbul B, et al. (2022) Thorax computed tomography findings and anti-SARS-CoV-2 immunoglobulin G levels in polymerase chain reaction-negative probable COVID-19 cases. Rev Assoc Med Bras 68: 1742-1746. https://doi.org/10.1590/1806-9282.20220921 ![]() |
[90] |
Chen W, Zhang J, Qin X, et al. (2020) SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibody levels are correlated with severity of COVID-19 pneumonia. Biomed Pharmacother 130: 110629. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biopha.2020.110629 ![]() |
[91] |
Jurenka J, Nagyová A, Dababseh M, et al. (2022) Anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody status at the time of hospital admission and the prognosis of patients with COVID-19: a prospective observational study. Infect Dis Rep 14: 1004-1016. https://doi.org/10.3390/idr14060100 ![]() |
[92] |
Jarrom D, Elston L, Washington J, et al. (2022) Effectiveness of tests to detect the presence of SARS-CoV-2 virus, and antibodies to SARS-CoV-2, to inform COVID-19 diagnosis: a rapid systematic review. BMJ Evid Based Med 27: 33-45. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjebm-2020-111511 ![]() |
[93] |
Wang H, Ai J, Loeffelholz MJ, et al. (2020) Meta-analysis of diagnostic performance of serology tests for COVID-19: impact of assay design and post-symptom-onset intervals. Emerg Microbes Infect 9: 2200-2211. https://doi.org/10.1080/22221751.2020.1826362 ![]() |
[94] |
Mekonnen D, Mengist HM, Derbie A, et al. (2021) Diagnostic accuracy of serological tests and kinetics of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 antibody: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Rev Med Virol 31: e2181. https://doi.org/10.1002/rmv.2181 ![]() |
[95] | Gracienta TJ, Herardi R, Santosa F, et al. (2021) Diagnostic accuracy of antibody-based rapid diagnostic tests in detecting coronavirus disease 2019: systematic review. Arch Med Sci 18: 949-957. https://doi.org/10.5114/aoms/135910 |
[96] | Fox T, Geppert J, Dinnes J, et al. (2022) Antibody tests for identification of current and past infection with SARS-CoV-2. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 11: CD013652. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD013652.pub2 |
[97] |
Kontou PI, Braliou GG, Dimou NL, et al. (2020) Antibody tests in detecting SARS-CoV-2 infection: a meta-analysis. Diagnostics (Basel) 10: 319. https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics10050319 ![]() |
[98] |
Mohit E, Rostami Z, Vahidi H, et al. (2021) A comparative review of immunoassays for COVID-19 detection. Expert Rev Clin Immunol 17: 573-599. https://doi.org/10.1080/1744666X.2021.1908886 ![]() |
[99] |
Fong Y, Huang Y, Benkeser D, et al. (2023) Immune correlates analysis of the PREVENT-19 COVID-19 vaccine efficacy clinical trial. Nat Commun 14: 331. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-022-35768-3 ![]() |
[100] |
Tran TT, Vaage EB, Mehta A, et al. (2023) Titers of antibodies against ancestral SARS-CoV-2 correlate with levels of neutralizing antibodies to multiple variants. NPJ Vaccines 7: 174. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41541-023-00600-6 ![]() |
[101] | World Health OrganizationEstablishment of the 2nd WHO International Standard for anti-SARS-CoV-2 immunoglobulin and Reference Panel for antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern (2022). Available from: https://www.who.int/publications/m/item/who-bs-2022.2427 |
[102] |
Mulder L, Carrères B, Muggli F, et al. (2022) A comparative study of nine SARS-CoV-2 IgG lateral flow assays using both post-infection and post-vaccination samples. J Clin Med 11: 2100. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm11082100 ![]() |
[103] |
Peghin M, Bontempo G, De Martino M, et al. (2022) Evaluation of qualitative and semi-quantitative cut offs for rapid diagnostic lateral flow test in relation to serology for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies: findings of a prospective study. BMC Infect Dis 22: 810. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12879-022-07786-5 ![]() |
[104] |
Findlater L, Trickey A, Jones HE, et al. (2022) Association of results of four lateral flow antibody tests with subsequent SARS-CoV-2 infection. Microbiol Spectr 10: e0246822. https://doi.org/10.1128/spectrum.02468-22 ![]() |
[105] |
Choi HW, Jeon CH, Won EJ, et al. (2022) Performance of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 serological diagnostic tests and antibody kinetics in coronavirus disease 2019 patients. Front Microbiol 13: 881038. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2022.881038 ![]() |
[106] |
Pan X, Kaminga AC, Chen Y, et al. (2022) Auxiliary screening COVID-19 by serology. Front Public Health 10: 819841. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2022.819841 ![]() |
[107] |
Zhu L, Xu X, Zhu B, et al. (2021) Kinetics of SARS-CoV-2 specific and neutralizing antibodies over seven months after symptom onset in COVID-19 patients. Microbiol Spectr 9: e0059021. https://doi.org/10.1128/Spectrum.00590-21 ![]() |
[108] |
Chansaenroj J, Yorsaeng R, Puenpa J, et al. (2022) Long-term persistence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) spike protein-specific and neutralizing antibodies in recovered COVID-19 patients. PLoS One 17: e0267102. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0267102 ![]() |
[109] |
Chansaenroj J, Yorsaeng R, Posuwan N, et al. (2021) Detection of SARS-CoV-2-specific antibodies via rapid diagnostic immunoassays in COVID-19 patients. Virol J 18: 52. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12985-021-01530-2 ![]() |
[110] |
Spicuzza L, Sambataro G, Bonsignore M, et al. (2022) Point of care antibody detection assays for past SARS-CoV-2 infection are accurate over the time. Infect Dis (Lond) 54: 464-466. https://doi.org/10.1080/23744235.2022.2036810 ![]() |
[111] |
Robertson LJ, Moore JS, Blighe K, et al. (2021) Evaluation of the IgG antibody response to SARS CoV-2 infection and performance of a lateral flow immunoassay: cross-sectional and longitudinal analysis over 11 months. BMJ Open 11: e048142. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-048142 ![]() |
[112] |
Ong DSY, Fragkou PC, Schweitzer VA, et al. (2021) How to interpret and use COVID-19 serology and immunology tests. Clin Microbiol Infect 27: 981-986. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cmi.2021.05.001 ![]() |
[113] |
Tong H, Cao C, You M, et al. (2022) Artificial intelligence-assisted colorimetric lateral flow immunoassay for sensitive and quantitative detection of COVID-19 neutralizing antibody. Biosens Bioelectron 213: 114449. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bios.2022.114449 ![]() |
[114] |
Pallett SJC, Rayment M, Heskin J, et al. (2022) Early identification of high-risk individuals for monoclonal antibody therapy and prophylaxis is feasible by SARS-CoV-2 anti-spike antibody specific lateral flow assay. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis 104: 115788. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.diagmicrobio.2022.115788 ![]() |
[115] |
Brownstein NC, Chen YA (2021) Predictive values, uncertainty, and interpretation of serology tests for the novel coronavirus. Sci Rep 11: 5491. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-84173-1 ![]() |
[116] |
Van den Hoogen LL, Smits G, van Hagen CCE, et al. (2022) Seropositivity to nucleoprotein to detect mild and asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infections: a complementary tool to detect breakthrough infections after COVID-19 vaccination?. Vaccine 40: 2251-2257. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2022.03.009 ![]() |
[117] |
Liu L, Wang P, Nair MS, et al. (2020) Potent neutralizing antibodies against multiple epitopes on SARS-CoV-2 spike. Nature 584: 450-456. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-020-2571-7 ![]() |
[118] |
Biby A, Wang X, Liu X, et al. (2022) Rapid testing for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). MRS Commun 12: 12-23. https://doi.org/10.1557/s43579-021-00146-5 ![]() |
[119] | Bradley T, Grundberg E, Selvarangan R, et al. (2021) Antibody responses boosted in seropositive healthcare workers after single dose of SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccine. MedRxiv . https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.02.03.21251078 |
[120] |
Baldanti F, Ganguly NK, Wang G, et al. (2022) Choice of SARS-CoV-2 diagnostic test: challenges and key considerations for the future. Crit Rev Clin Lab Sci 59: 445-459. https://doi.org/10.1080/10408363.2022.2045250 ![]() |
[121] | Kitchin N Pfizer/BioNTech COVID-19 mRNA vaccine (2020). Available from: https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/acip/meetings/downloads/slides-2020-08/Pfizer-COVID-19-vaccine-ACIP-presentation-508.pdf |
[122] |
Sami S, Tenforde MW, Talbot HK, et al. (2021) Adults hospitalized with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-United States, March-June and October-December 2020: implications for the potential effects of COVID-19 Tier-1 vaccination on future hospitalizations and outcomes. Clin Infect Dis 73: S32-S37. https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/ciab319 ![]() |
[123] |
Cann A, Clarke C, Brown J, et al. (2022) Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) antibody lateral flow assay for antibody prevalence studies following vaccination: a diagnostic accuracy study. Wellcome Open Res 6: 358. https://doi.org/10.12688/wellcomeopenres.17231.2 ![]() |
[124] |
Fulford TS, Van H, Gherardin NA, et al. (2021) A point-of-care lateral flow assay for neutralising antibodies against SARS-CoV-2. EBioMedicine 74: 103729. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ebiom.2021.103729 ![]() |
[125] |
Shurrab FM, Younes N, Al-Sadeq DW, et al. (2022) Performance evaluation of novel fluorescent-based lateral flow immunoassay (LFIA) for rapid detection and quantification of total anti-SARS-CoV-2 S-RBD binding antibodies in infected individuals. Int J Infect Dis 118: 132-137. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijid.2022.02.052 ![]() |
[126] |
Moeller ME, Engsig FN, Bade M, et al. (2022) Rapid quantitative point-of-care diagnostic test for post COVID-19 vaccination antibody monitoring. Microbiol Spectr 10: e0039622. https://doi.org/10.1128/spectrum.00396-22 ![]() |
[127] |
Greenland-Bews C, Byrne RL, Owen SI, et al. (2023) Evaluation of eight lateral flow tests for the detection of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in a vaccinated population. BMC Infect Dis 23: 110. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12879-023-08033-1 ![]() |
[128] |
Lee W, Kurien P (2023) Evaluation of a point of care lateral flow assay for antibody detection following SARS CoV-2 mRNA vaccine series. J Immunol Methods 513: 113410. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jim.2022.113410 ![]() |
[129] |
Nickel O, Rockstroh A, Borte S, et al. (2022) Evaluation of simple lateral flow immunoassays for detection of SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibodies. Vaccines (Basel) 10: 347. https://doi.org/10.3390/vaccines10030347 ![]() |
[130] | Wang Q, Feng L, Zhang H, et al. (2022) Longitudinal waning of mRNA vaccine-induced neutralizing antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 detected by an LFIA rapid test. Antib Ther 5: 55-62. https://doi.org/10.1093/abt/tbac004 |
[131] |
Sauré D, O'Ryan M, Torres JP, et al. (2023) COVID-19 lateral flow IgG seropositivity and serum neutralising antibody responses after primary and booster vaccinations in Chile: a cross-sectional study. Lancet Microbe 4: e149-e158. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2666-5247(22)00290-7 ![]() |
[132] |
Akkız H (2022) The biological functions and clinical significance of SARS-CoV-2 variants of corcern. Front Med (Lausanne) 9: 849217. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2022.849217 ![]() |
[133] |
Khan K, Karim F, Ganga Y, et al. (2022) Omicron BA.4/BA.5 escape neutralizing immunity elicited by BA.1 infection. Nat Commun 13: 4686. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-022-32396-9 ![]() |
[134] |
Cao Y, Wang J, Jian F, et al. (2022) Omicron escapes the majority of existing SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibodies. Nature 602: 657-663. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-022-32396-9 ![]() |
[135] |
Groenheit R, Galanis I, Sondén K, et al. (2023) Rapid emergence of omicron sublineages expressing spike protein R346T. Lancet Reg Health Eur 24: 100564. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lanepe.2022.100564 ![]() |
[136] |
Ao D, He X, Hong W, et al. (2023) The rapid rise of SARS-CoV-2 Omicron subvariants with immune evasion properties: XBB.1.5 and BQ.1.1 subvariants. MedComm 4: e239. https://doi.org/10.1002/mco2.239 ![]() |
[137] |
Thomas SJ, Moreira Jr ED, Kitchin N, et al. (2021) Safety and efficacy of the BNT162b2 mRNA Covid-19 vaccine through 6 months. N Engl J Med 385: 1761-1773. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-022-32396-9 ![]() |
[138] |
Gao F, Zheng M, Fan J, et al. (2023) A trimeric spike-based COVID-19 vaccine candidate induces broad neutralization against SARS-CoV-2 variants. Hum Vaccin Immunother 19: 2186110. https://doi.org/10.1080/21645515.2023.2186110 ![]() |
[139] |
Singh J, Samal J, Kumar V, et al. (2021) Structure-function analyses of new SARS-CoV-2 variants B.1.1.7, B.1.351 and B.1.1.28.1: clinical, diagnostic, therapeutic and public health implications. Viruses 13: 439. https://doi.org/10.3390/v13030439 ![]() |
[140] |
Lu L, Chen LL, Zhang RR, et al. (2022) Boosting of serum neutralizing activity against the Omicron variant among recovered COVID-19 patients by BNT162b2 and CoronaVac vaccines. EBioMedicine 79: 103986. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ebiom.2022.103986 ![]() |
[141] |
Rössler A, Knabl L, Raschbichler LM, et al. (2023) Reduced sensitivity of antibody tests after omicron infection. Lancet Microbe 4: e10-e11. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2666-5247(22)00222-1 ![]() |
[142] |
Springer DN, Perkmann T, Jani CM, et al. (2022) Reduced sensitivity of commercial spike-specific antibody assays after primary infection with the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant. Microbiol Spectr 10: e0212922. https://doi.org/10.1128/spectrum.02129-22 ![]() |
[143] |
Heggestad JT, Britton RJ, Kinnamon DS, et al. (2023) COVID-19 diagnosis and SARS-CoV-2 strain identification by a rapid, multiplexed, point-of-care antibody microarray. Anal Chem 95: 5610-5617. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.analchem.2c05180 ![]() |
[144] |
Falzone L, Gattuso G, Tsatsakis A, et al. (2021) Current and innovative methods for the diagnosis of COVID-19 infection. Int J Mol Med 47. https://doi.org/10.3892/ijmm.2021.4933 ![]() |
1. | Rodrigo Moreira, Larissa Ferreira Rodrigues Moreira, Flávio de Oliveira Silva, Brazilian Selic Rate Forecasting with Deep Neural Networks, 2024, 0927-7099, 10.1007/s10614-024-10597-2 | |
2. | Michele Bufalo, Claudia Ceci, Giuseppe Orlando, Addressing the financial impact of natural disasters in the era of climate change, 2024, 73, 10629408, 102152, 10.1016/j.najef.2024.102152 | |
3. | Guo-Hui Yang, Si-Qi Ma, Xiao-Dong Bian, Jiang-Cheng Li, Pierluigi Vellucci, The roles of liquidity and delay in financial markets based on an optimal forecasting model, 2023, 18, 1932-6203, e0290869, 10.1371/journal.pone.0290869 | |
4. | Giacomo Ascione, Michele Bufalo, Giuseppe Orlando, Modeling volatility of disaster-affected populations: A non-homogeneous geometric-skew Brownian motion approach, 2024, 130, 10075704, 107761, 10.1016/j.cnsns.2023.107761 |