Evaluation of 11 SARS-CoV-2 antibody tests by using samples from patients with defined IgG antibody titers.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Lagerqvist N
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8027209 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) serological assays are urgently needed for rapid diagnosis, contact tracing, and for epidemiological studies. So far, there is limited data on how commercially available tests perform with real patient samples, and if positive tested samples show neutralizing abilities. Focusing on IgG antibodies, we demonstrate the performance of two enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) assays (Euroimmun SARS-CoV-2 IgG and Vircell COVID-19 ELISA IgG) in comparison to one lateral flow assay (FaStep COVID-19 IgG/IgM Rapid Test Device) and two in-house developed assays (immunofluorescence assay [IFA] and plaque reduction neutralization test [PRNT]). We tested follow up serum/plasma samples of individuals polymerase chain reaction-diagnosed with COVID-19. Most of the SARS-CoV-2 samples were from individuals with moderate to the severe clinical course, who required an in-patient hospital stay. For all examined assays, the sensitivity ranged from 58.8 to 76.5% for the early phase of infection (days 5-9) and from 93.8% to 100% for the later period (days 10-18).
| S-EPMC7300776 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe SARS-CoV-2 (Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome CoronaVirus 2) is responsible for the infectious respiratory disease called COVID-19 (COronaVIrus Disease 2019). In response to the growing COVID-19 pandemic, point-of-care (POC) tests have been developed to detect specific antibodies, IgG and IgM, to SARS-CoV-2 virus in human whole blood. We conducted a prospective observational study to evaluate the performance of two POC tests, COVID-PRESTO® and COVID-DUO®, compared to the gold standard, RT-PCR (real-time reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction).MethodsRT-PCR testing of SARS-Cov-2 was performed from nasopharyngeal swab specimens collected in adult patients visiting the infectious disease department at the hospital (Orléans, France). Capillary whole blood (CWB) samples from the fingertip taken at different time points after onset of the disease were tested with POC tests. The specificity and sensitivity of the rapid test kits compared to test of reference (RT-PCR) were calculated.ResultsAmong 381 patients with symptoms of COVID-19 who went to the hospital for a diagnostic, 143 patients were RT-PCR negative. Results of test with POC tests were all negative for these patients, indicating a specificity of 100% for both POC tests. In the RT-PCR positive subgroup (n = 238), 133 patients were tested with COVID-PRESTO® and 129 patients were tested with COVID-DUO® (24 patients tested with both). The further the onset of symptoms was from the date of collection, the greater the sensitivity. The sensitivity of COVID-PRESTO® test ranged from 10.00% for patients having experienced their 1st symptoms from 0 to 5 days ago to 100% in patients where symptoms had occurred more than 15 days before the date of tests. For COVID-DUO® test, the sensitivity ranged from 35.71% [0-5 days] to 100% (> 15 days).ConclusionCOVID-PRESTO® and DUO® POC tests turned out to be very specific (none false positive) and to be sensitive enough after 15 days from onset of symptom. These easy to use IgG/IgM combined test kits are the first ones allowing a screening with CWB sample, by typing from a finger prick. These rapid tests are particularly interesting for screening in low resource settings.
| S-EPMC7498027 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe 2019 novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 virus (SARS-CoV-2) is a current worldwide threat for which the immunological features after infection need to be investigated. The aim of this study was to establish a highly sensitive and quantitative detection method for SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibody and to compare the antibody reaction difference in patients with different disease severity.ResultsRecombinant SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid protein was expressed in Escherichia coli and purified to establish an indirect IgG ELISA detection system. The sensitivity of the ELISA was 100% with a specificity of 96.8% and a 98.3% concordance when compared to a colloidal gold kit, in addition, the sensitivity of the ELISA was 100% with a specificity of 98.9% and a 99.4% concordance when compared to a SARS-CoV-2 spike S1 protein IgG antibody ELISA kit. The increased sensitivity resulted in a higher rate of IgG antibody detection for COVID-19 patients. Moreover, the quantitative detection can be conducted with a much higher serum dilution (1:400 vs 1:10, 1:400 vs 1:100). The antibody titers of 88 patients with differing COVID-19 severity at their early convalescence ranged from 800 to 102,400, and the geometric mean titer for severe and critical cases, moderate cases, asymptomatic and mild cases was 51,203, 20,912, and 9590 respectively.ConclusionThe development of a highly sensitive ELISA system for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies is described herein. This system enabled a quantitative study of rSARS-CoV-2-N IgG antibody titers in COVID-19 patients, the occurrence of higher IgG antibody titers were found to be correlated with more severe cases.
| S-EPMC8683808 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The aim of this study was to assess the analytic and clinical performance of four rapid lateral flow point-of-care tests (POCTs) for identifying SARS-CoV-2-specific antibodies. A retrospective study was conducted between 22 January and 30 March 2020 on 132 serum samples for SARS-CoV-2-specific antibody detection referred to a tertiary referral hospital laboratory in New South Wales. Multiple sera were tested from 20 confirmed or suspected COVID-19 patients with SARS-CoV-2-specific antibodies detected by immunofluorescence (IFA) or neutralisation, and 71 SARS-CoV-2 uninfected individuals. We measured the sensitivity and specificity for detection of SARS-CoV-2 IgM and IgG antibodies for each POCT in comparison to positive SARS-CoV-2-specific IFA and viral neutralisation, our current laboratory benchmark tests. All POCTs were found to have a low analytic sensitivity for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies, ranging from 27.3% to 58.2%, with a specificity between 88.3% and 100%, and a low clinical sensitivity from 45% to 65%, with a clinical specificity between 87.3% and 100%. All POCTs had an increased sensitivity when specimens were collected more than 14 days from onset of symptoms. The detection using point-of-care testing of SARS-CoV-2-specific antibodies after disease onset lagged behind IFA by a range of 0-9 days. POCTs promise the benefit of providing quick easy testing for SARS-CoV-2-specific antibodies. However, their poor sensitivity and delayed antibody detection make them unsuitable as a diagnostic or screening tool alone.
| S-EPMC7508500 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionThe usefulness of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) antibody tests in asymptomatic individuals has not been well validated, although they have satisfied sensitivity and specificity in symptomatic patients. In this study, we investigated the significance of IgM and IgG antibody titers against SARS-CoV-2 in the serum of asymptomatic healthy subjects.MethodsFrom June 2020, we recruited 10,039 participants to the project named the University of Tokyo COVID-19 Antibody Titer Survey (UT-CATS), and measured iFlash-SARS-CoV-2 IgM and IgG (YHLO IgM and IgG) titers in the collected serum. For the samples with increased IgM or IgG titers, we performed additional measurements using Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Ig (Roche total Ig) and Architect SARS-CoV-2 IgG (Abbott IgG) and investigated the reactivity to N, S1, and receptor binding domain (RBD) proteins.ResultsAfter setting the cutoff value at 5 AU/mL, 61 (0.61%) were positive for YHLO IgM and 104 (1.04%) for YHLO IgG. Few samples with elevated YHLO IgM showed reactivity to S1 or RBD proteins, and IgG titers did not increase during the follow-up in any samples. The samples with elevated YHLO IgG consisted of two groups: one reacted to S1 or RBD proteins and the other did not, which was reflected in the results of Roche total Ig.ConclusionsIn SARS-CoV-2 seroepidemiological studies of asymptomatic participants, sufficient attention should be given to the interpretation of the results of YHLO IgM and IgG, and the combined use of YHLO IgG and Roche total Ig might be more reliable.
| S-EPMC8648596 | biostudies-literature
Project description:SARS-CoV-2 antibody tests are available in various formats, detecting different viral target proteins and antibody subclasses. The specificity and sensitivity of SARS-CoV-2 antibody tests are known to vary and very few studies have addressed the performance of these tests in COVID-19 patient groups at different time points. We here compared the sensitivity and specificity of seven commercial (SNIBE, Epitope, Euroimmun, Roche, Abbott, DiaSorin, Biosensor) and two in-house LIPS assays (LIPS N and LIPS S-RBD) IgG/total Ab tests in serum samples from 97 COVID-19 patients and 100 controls, and correlated the results with the patients' clinical data and the time-point the test was performed. We found a remarkable variation in the sensitivity of antibody tests with the following performance: LIPS N (91.8%), Epitope (85.6%), Abbott and in-house LIPS S-RBD (both 84.5%), Roche (83.5%), Euroimmun (82.5%), DiaSorin (81.4%), SNIBE (70.1%), and Biosensor (64.9%). The overall agreement between the tests was between 71-95%, whereas the specificity of all tests was within 98-100%. The correlation with patients' clinical symptoms score ranged from strongest in LIPS N (ρ = 0.41; p<0.001) to nonsignificant in LIPS S-RBD. Furthermore, the time of testing since symptom onset had an impact on the sensitivity of some tests. Our study highlights the importance to consider clinical symptoms, time of testing, and using more than one viral antigen in SARS-CoV-2 antibody testing. Our results suggest that some antibody tests are more sensitive for the detection of antibodies in early stage and asymptomatic patients, which may explain the contradictory results of previous studies and should be taken into consideration in clinical practice and epidemiological studies.
| S-EPMC7591045 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Serological SARS-CoV-2 assays are urgently needed for diagnosis, contact tracing and for epidemiological studies. So far, there is limited data on how recently commercially available, high-throughput immunoassays, using different recombinant SARS-CoV-2 antigens, perform with clinical samples. Focusing on IgG and total antibodies, we demonstrate the performance of four automated immunoassays (Abbott Architect™ i2000 (N protein-based)), Roche cobas™ e 411 analyzer (N protein-based, not differentiating between IgA, IgM or IgG antibodies), LIAISON®XL platform (S1 and S2 protein-based), VIRCLIA® automation system (S1 and N protein-based) in comparison to two ELISA assays (Euroimmun SARS-CoV-2 IgG (S1 protein-based) and Virotech SARS-CoV-2 IgG ELISA (N protein-based)) and an in-house developed plaque reduction neutralization test (PRNT). We tested follow up serum/plasma samples of individuals PCR-diagnosed with COVID-19. When calculating the overall sensitivity, in a time frame of 49 days after first PCR-positivity, the PRNT as gold standard, showed the highest sensitivity with 93.3% followed by the dual-target assay for the VIRCLIA® automation system with 89%. The overall sensitivity in the group of N protein-based assays ranged from 66.7 to 77.8% and in the S protein-based-assays from 71.1 to 75.6%. Five follow-up samples of three individuals were only detected in either an S and/or N protein-based assay, indicating an individual different immune response to SARS-CoV-2 and the influence of the used assay in the detection of IgG antibodies. This should be further analysed. The specificity of the examined assays was ? 97%. However, because of the low or unknown prevalence of SARS-CoV-2, the examined assays in this study are currently primarily eligible for epidemiological investigations, as they have limited information in individual testing.
| S-EPMC7263247 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC8452591 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionThe worldwide pandemic of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has continued to date. Given that some of the patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) are asymptomatic, antibody tests are useful to determine whether there is a previous infection with SARS-CoV-2. In this study, we measured IgM and IgG antibody titers against SARS-CoV-2 in the serum of asymptomatic healthy subjects in The University of Tokyo, Japan.MethodsFrom June 2020, we recruited participants, who were students, staff, and faculty members of The University of Tokyo in the project named The University of Tokyo COVID-19 Antibody Titer Survey (UT-CATS). Following blood sample collection, participants were required to answer an online questionnaire about their social and health information. We measured IgG and IgM titers against SARS-CoV-2 using iFlash-SARS-CoV-2 IgM and IgG detection kit which applies a chemiluminescent immunoassay (CLIA) for the qualitative detection.ResultsThere were 6609 volunteers in this study. After setting the cutoff value at 10 AU/mL, 32 (0.48%) were positive for IgG and 16 (0.24%) for IgM. Of six participants with a history of COVID-19, five were positive for IgG, whereas all were negative for IgM. The median titer of IgG was 0.40 AU/mL and 0.39 AU/mL for IgM. Both IgG and IgM titers were affected by gender, age, smoking status, and comorbidities.ConclusionsPositive rates of IgG and IgM titers were relatively low in our university. Serum levels of these antibodies were affected by several factors, which might affect the clinical course of COVID-19.
| S-EPMC8196331 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Antibodies serve as biomarkers of infection, but if sustained can confer long-term immunity. Yet, for most clinically approved vaccines, binding antibody titers only serve as a surrogate of protection. Instead, the ability of vaccine induced antibodies to neutralize or mediate Fc-effector functions is mechanistically linked to protection. While evidence has begun to point to persisting antibody responses among SARS-CoV-2 infected individuals, cases of re-infection have begun to emerge, calling the protective nature of humoral immunity against this highly infectious pathogen into question. Using a community-based surveillance study, we aimed to define the relationship between titers and functional antibody activity to SARS-CoV-2 over time. Here we report significant heterogeneity, but limited decay, across antibody titers amongst 120 identified seroconverters, most of whom had asymptomatic infection. Notably, neutralization, Fc-function, and SARS-CoV-2 specific T cell responses were only observed in subjects that elicited RBD-specific antibody titers above a threshold. The findings point to a switch-like relationship between observed antibody titer and function, where a distinct threshold of activity-defined by the level of antibodies-is required to elicit vigorous humoral and cellular response. This response activity level may be essential for durable protection, potentially explaining why re-infections occur with SARS-CoV-2 and other common coronaviruses.
| S-EPMC7884400 | biostudies-literature