Kinetics and seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies: a comparison of 3 different assays.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Kahre E
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8295301 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC7833611 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundSeroprevalence studies of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) cases, including asymptomatic and past infections, are important to estimate the scale of the disease outbreak and to establish quarantine measures. We evaluated the clinical performance of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) antibody assays available in Korea for use in seroprevalence studies.MethodsThe sensitivity, specificity, cross-reactivity, and interference of five SARS-CoV-2 antibody assays were evaluated using the following: 398 serum samples from confirmed COVID-19 patients, 510 negative control samples from before 2018 (pre-pandemic), 163 serum samples from patients with SARS, Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS), and other viral infections, and five samples for the interference study.ResultsThe sensitivities of the five assays ranged from 92.2% to 98%, and their specificities, including cross-reactivity and interference, ranged from 97.5% to 100%. The agreement rates were excellent (kappa >0.9). Adjustment of the cutoff values could be considered through ROC curve analysis. The positive predictive values of the individual assays varied from 3.5% to 100% at a 0.1% prevalence but were as high as ≥95% when two assays were combined.ConclusionsThe prevalence of COVID-19 in Korea is considered to be exceptionally low at present; thus, we recommend using a combination of two or more SARS-CoV-2 antibody assays rather than a single assay. These results could help select SARS-CoV-2 antibody assays for COVID-19 seroprevalence studies in Korea.
| S-EPMC8368235 | biostudies-literature
Project description:SARS-CoV-2 virus was first detected in late 2019 and circulated globally, causing COVID-19, which is characterised by sub-clinical to severe disease in humans. Here, we investigate the serological antibody responses to SARS-CoV-2 infection during acute and convalescent infection using a cohort of (i) COVID-19 patients admitted to hospital, (ii) healthy individuals who had experienced 'COVID-19 like-illness', and (iii) a cohort of healthy individuals prior to the emergence of SARS-CoV-2. We compare SARS-CoV-2 specific antibody detection rates from four different serological methods, virus neutralisation test (VNT), ID Screen® SARS-CoV-2-N IgG ELISA, Whole Antigen ELISA, and lentivirus-based SARS-CoV-2 pseudotype virus neutralisation tests (pVNT). All methods were able to detect prior infection with COVID-19, albeit with different relative sensitivities. The VNT and SARS-CoV-2-N ELISA methods showed a strong correlation yet provided increased detection rates when used in combination. A pVNT correlated strongly with SARS-CoV-2 VNT and was able to effectively discriminate SARS-CoV-2 antibody positive and negative serum with the same efficiency as the VNT. Moreover, the pVNT was performed with the same level of discrimination across multiple separate institutions. Therefore, the pVNT is a sensitive, specific, and reproducible lower biosafety level alternative to VNT for detecting SARS-CoV-2 antibodies for diagnostic and research applications. Our data illustrate the potential utility of applying VNT or pVNT and ELISA antibody tests in parallel to enhance the sensitivity of exposure to infection.
| S-EPMC8074400 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe emergence of the global SARS-CoV-2 pandemic required the rapid and large-scale deployment of PCR and serological tests in different formats.ObjectivesReal-life evaluation of these tests is needed. Using 168 samples from patients hospitalized for COVID-19, non-hospitalized patients but infected with SARS-CoV-2, patients participating in screening campaigns, and samples from patients with a history of other seasonal coronavirus infections, we evaluated the clinical performance of 5 serological assays widely used worldwide (WANTAI®, BIORAD®, EUROIMMUN®, ABBOTT® and LIAISON®).ResultsFor hospitalized patients, all these assays showed a sensitivity of 100 % from day 9 after the symptoms onset. On the other hand, sensitivity was much lower for patients who did not require hospitalization for COVID-19 confirmed by PCR (from 91.6 % for WANTAI® to 69 % for LIAISON®). These differences do not seem to be due to the antigens chosen by the manufacturers but more to the test formats (IgG detection versus total antibodies). In addition, more than 50 days after a positive PCR for CoV-2-SARS the proportion of positive patients seem to decrease. We did not observe any significant cross-reactions for these techniques with the four other seasonal coronaviruses.ConclusionIn conclusion, the evaluation and knowledge of the serological tests used is important and should require an optimized strategy adaptation of the analysis laboratories to best meet patient's expectations in the face of this health crisis.
| S-EPMC7396207 | biostudies-literature
Project description:It is of paramount importance to evaluate the prevalence of both asymptomatic and symptomatic cases of SARS-CoV-2 infection and their differing antibody response profiles. Here, we performed a pilot study of four serological assays to assess the amounts of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in serum samples obtained from 491 healthy individuals before the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, 51 individuals hospitalized with COVID-19, 209 suspected cases of COVID-19 with mild symptoms, and 200 healthy blood donors. We used two ELISA assays that recognized the full-length nucleoprotein (N) or trimeric spike (S) protein ectodomain of SARS-CoV-2. In addition, we developed the S-Flow assay that recognized the S protein expressed at the cell surface using flow cytometry, and the luciferase immunoprecipitation system (LIPS) assay that recognized diverse SARS-CoV-2 antigens including the S1 domain and the carboxyl-terminal domain of N by immunoprecipitation. We obtained similar results with the four serological assays. Differences in sensitivity were attributed to the technique and the antigen used. High anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody titers were associated with neutralization activity, which was assessed using infectious SARS-CoV-2 or lentiviral-S pseudotype virus. In hospitalized patients with COVID-19, seroconversion and virus neutralization occurred between 5 and 14 days after symptom onset, confirming previous studies. Seropositivity was detected in 32% of mildly symptomatic individuals within 15 days of symptom onset and in 3% of healthy blood donors. The four antibody assays that we used enabled a broad evaluation of SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence and antibody profiling in different subpopulations within one region.
| S-EPMC7665313 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background and objectivesAccess to large pools of healthy adult donors advantageously positions blood component providers to undertake anti-SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence studies. While numerous seroprevalence reports have been published by blood operators during the COVID-19 pandemic, details on the assay used has not been well documented. The objectives of this study were to evaluate the diversity of assays being used by blood operators and assess how this may affect seroprevalence estimates.Materials and methodsWe surveyed 49 blood component providers from 39 countries. Questionnaire included information on the number and identity of assays used, the detected immunoglobulin(s) and target antigen, and performance characteristics (sensitivity, specificity).ResultsThirty-eight of the 49 contacted blood suppliers provided at least partial responses. The results indicate that 19 commercial and five in-house serology assays have been used by surveyed blood operators. The Abbott SARS-CoV-2 IgG assay was the most commonly used kit and utilized by 15 blood suppliers. Two assays did not detect IgG, but detected either IgM/IgA or IgM. 68·2% of assays targeted the spike protein and 50% the nucleocapsid protein, while 18·2% targeted both viral proteins. The sensitivity and specificity of IgG-specific assays ranged from 71·9% to 100% and from 96·2% to 100%, respectively. As of 18 October 2020, the seroprevalence was below 5% in 10 of 14 countries reporting.ConclusionOur results highlight the diversity of assays being used. Analyses comparing blood donor seroprevalence across countries should consider assay characteristics with optimization of signal/cut-off ratios and consistent methodology to adjust for waning antibody.
| S-EPMC8242559 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-BSST379 | biostudies-other
Project description:In 2020, Korea Disease Control and Prevention Agency reported three rounds of surveys on seroprevalence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) antibodies in South Korea. SARS-CoV-2 is the virus which inflicts the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We analyze the seroprevalence surveys using a Bayesian method with an informative prior distribution on the seroprevalence parameter, and the sensitivity and specificity of the diagnostic test. We construct the informative prior of the sensitivity and specificity of the diagnostic test using the posterior distribution obtained from the clinical evaluation data. The constraint of the seroprevalence parameter induced from the known confirmed coronavirus 2019 cases can be imposed naturally in the proposed Bayesian model. We also prove that the confidence interval of the seroprevalence parameter based on the Rao's test can be the empty set, while the Bayesian method renders interval estimators with coverage probability close to the nominal level. As of the 30th of October 2020, the 95% credible interval of the estimated SARS-CoV-2 positive population does not exceed 318, 685, approximately 0.62% of the Korean population.Supplementary informationThe online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s42952-021-00131-7.
| S-EPMC8142885 | biostudies-literature
Project description:We conducted a nationwide study of the prevalence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection in the Faroe Islands. Of 1,075 randomly selected participants, 6 (0.6%) tested seropositive for antibodies to the virus. Adjustment for test sensitivity and specificity yielded a 0.7% prevalence. Our findings will help us evaluate our public health response.
| S-EPMC7588539 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The objective of this longitudinal cohort study was to determine the seroprevalence of antibodies to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) in healthcare workers employed at healthcare settings in three rural counties in eastern South Dakota and western Minnesota from May 13, 2020, through December 22, 2020. Three blood draws were performed at five clinical sites and tested for the presence of antibodies against the SARS-CoV-2. Serum samples were tested for the presence of antibodies using a fluorescent microsphere immunoassay (FMIA), neutralization of SARS-CoV-2 spike-pseudotyped particles (SARS-CoV-2pp) assay, and serum virus neutralization (SVN) assay. The seroprevalence was determined to be 1/336 (0.29%) for samples collected from 5/13/20 to 7/13/20, 5/260 (1.92%) for samples collected from 8/13/20 to 9/25/20, and 35/235 (14.89%) for samples collected from 10/16/20 to 12/22/20. Eight of the 35 (22.8%) seropositive individuals identified in the final draw did not report a previous diagnosis with COVID-19. There was a high correlation (>90%) between the FMIA and virus neutralization assays. Each clinical site's seroprevalence was higher than the cumulative incidence for the general public in the respective county as reported by state public health agencies. As of December 2020, there was a high percentage (85%) of seronegative individuals in the study population.
| S-EPMC8426917 | biostudies-literature