Browse
Submit Data
Databases
API
Help

Dataset Information

22 Views

0 Connections

0 Citations

0 Reanalyses

0 Downloads

Omics score: 0

The WHO International Standard for COVID-19 serological tests: towards harmonization of anti-spike assays.

ABSTRACT:

Background and aims

SARS-CoV-2 antibody assays are relevant in managing the COVID-19 pandemic, providing valuable data on the immunization status of the population. However, current serology tests are highly variable, due to their different characteristics and to the lack of reference materials. The aim of the World Health Organization (WHO) first International Standard (IS) for anti-SARS-CoV-2 immunoglobulin is to harmonize humoral immune response assessment after natural infection or vaccination, and recommend reporting the results for binding activity in Binding Antibody Units (BAU).

Materials and methods

This study analyzed six commercial quantitative anti-SARS-CoV-2 S-protein assays in a head-to-head comparison, using the manufacturers' conversion factors for the WHO IS to obtain BAU/mL values.

Results

Our data showed good alignment up to 1000 BAU/mL, then began to disperse, exhibiting some discrepancies. Moreover, correlations among methods varied with Cohen's Kappa ranging from 0.580 to 1.00, with the lowest agreement values for kits using different target antigens or different antibody isotypes, making it clear that the laboratory report should include this information. Values expressed as BAU/ml showed a reduced between-assays variability compared to AU/ml (median coefficients of variation 0.38 and 0.68, respectively; p < 0.001).

Conclusion

On the basis of these data at present anti-SARS CoV-2 serological assays' results are not interchangeable, and, more importantly, individual immune monitoring should be performed with the same method.

SUBMITTER: Infantino M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8403673 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Json Xml

Similar Datasets

Harmonization of Zika neutralization assays by using the WHO International Standard for anti-Zika virus antibody.

Project description:During outbreaks of emerging viruses, such as the Zika outbreak in 2015-2016, speed and accuracy in detection of infection are critical factors to control the spread of the disease; often serological and diagnostic methods for emerging viruses are not well developed and validated. Thus, vaccines and treatments are difficult to evaluate due to the lack of comparable methods. In this study, we show how the 1st WHO International Standard for anti-Zika antibody was able to harmonize the neutralization titres of a panel of serological Zika-positive samples from laboratories worldwide. Expression of the titres in International Unit per millilitre reduced the inter-laboratory variance, allowing for greater comparability between laboratories. We advocate the use of the International Standard for anti-Zika virus antibodies for the calibration of neutralization assays to create a common language, which will permit a clear evaluation of the results of different clinical trials and expedite the vaccine/treatment development.

| S-EPMC6791859 | biostudies-other

A multi-laboratory study of diverse RSV neutralization assays indicates feasibility for harmonization with an international standard.

Project description:A current barrier to the standardized evaluation of respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) vaccine candidates is the wide variety of virus neutralization assay formats currently in use for assessing immunogenicity. Assay formats vary widely in labor intensiveness, duration, and sample throughput. Furthermore, the cell lines and virus strains used are not consistent among formats. The purpose of this multi-laboratory study was to assess the variability across a diverse array of assay formats that quantitate RSV neutralizing antibodies. Using a common specimen panel, the degree of overall agreement among existing assays was evaluated to inform on the need for harmonization of assay results. A total of 12 laboratories participated in the blinded survey study by testing a panel comprised of 57 samples chosen to span the reportable titer range of the assays. An independent statistical analysis was conducted to measure overall agreement of assay results. This analysis showed that precision was consistently high, whereas agreement varied widely among assays. To examine whether agreement could be improved, we conducted a harmonization exercise using a variety of sample types as pseudo standards. The results showed that the level of agreement could be improved, and provided information on the suitability of samples for developing an international standard.

| S-EPMC5439532 | biostudies-literature

Towards Quantitative and Standardized Serological and Neutralization Assays for COVID-19.

Project description:Quantitative and robust serology assays are critical measurements underpinning global COVID-19 response to diagnostic, surveillance, and vaccine development. Here, we report a proof-of-concept approach for the development of quantitative, multiplexed flow cytometry-based serological and neutralization assays. The serology assays test the IgG and IgM against both the full-length spike antigens and the receptor binding domain (RBD) of the spike antigen. Benchmarking against an RBD-specific SARS-CoV IgG reference standard, the anti-SARS-CoV-2 RBD antibody titer was quantified in the range of 37.6 µg/mL to 31.0 ng/mL. The quantitative assays are highly specific with no correlative cross-reactivity with the spike proteins of MERS, SARS1, OC43 and HKU1 viruses. We further demonstrated good correlation between anti-RBD antibody titers and neutralizing antibody titers. The suite of serology and neutralization assays help to improve measurement confidence and are complementary and foundational for clinical and epidemiologic studies.

| S-EPMC7962843 | biostudies-literature

Harmonization of six quantitative SARS-CoV-2 serological assays using sera of vaccinated subjects.

Project description:Background and aimsVaccines, to limit SARS-CoV-2 infection, were produced and reliable assays are needed for their evaluation. The WHO produced an International-Standard (WHO-IS) to facilitate the standardization/comparison of serological methods. The WHO-IS, produced in limited amount, was never tested for reproducibility. This study aims at developing a reproducible and accessible working standard (WS) to complement the WHO-IS.Materials and methodsSera from vaccinated individuals were used to produce the WSs. The WHO-IS, the WSs and single serum samples (n = 48) were tested on 6 quantitative serological devices. Neutralization assays were performed for the 48 samples and compared with their antibody titers.ResultsThe WS carry an antibody titer 20-fold higher than the WHO-IS. It was reproducible, showed both good linearity and insignificant intra- and inter-laboratory variability. However, the WSs behave differently from the WHO-IS. Analysis of the 48 samples showed that single correlation factors are not sufficient to harmonize results from different assays. Yet, all the devices predict neutralization activity based on the antibody titer.ConclusionsA reproducible and highly concentrated WS, specific for IgG against SARS-CoV-2 Spike-glycoprotein was produced. Such characteristics make it particularly suited for the harmonization of commercially available assays and the consequent evaluation of post-vaccinated individuals.

| S-EPMC8378065 | biostudies-literature

Rapid Serological Tests for SARS-CoV-2: Diagnostic Performance of 4 Commercial Assays.

Project description:ObjectiveTo assess the diagnostic performance of lateral flow immunochromatographic assays (LFAs) of 4 different manufacturers to identify SARS-CoV-2 antibodies (IgM, IgG, or total), comparing them with the nucleic acid amplification test (NAAT) or the clinical defined test (definite or probable SARS-CoV-2 infection, respectively).MethodsOne hundred nineteen serum samples were randomly selected by convenience and distributed in the following groups: (1) group with SARS-CoV-2 infection (n = 82; RT-qPCR positive [definite, n = 70] and probable [n = 12]); (2) other diseases (n = 27; other viruses identified [n = 8] and SARS of other etiologies [n = 19]); and (3) healthy control group (n = 10). LFAs of 4 manufacturers were compared: MedTest Coronavirus (COVID-19) IgG/IgM (MedLevensohn, Brazil); COVID-19 IgG/IgM ECO Test (Ecodiagnóstica, Brazil); Camtech COVID-19 IgM/IgG Rapid Test Kit (Camtech Diagnostics Pte Ltd, Singapore); and 1-Step COVID-19 Test for total antibodies (Guangzhou Wondfo Biotech Co., China).ResultsThe 4 tests studied showed high diagnostic performance characteristics for the diagnoses of definite or probable SARS-CoV-2 infection. The best measures were for the Wondfo test: sensitivity (86.59%; 95% CI: 77.26-93.11%), specificity (100%; 90.51-100%), DOR (257; 60-1,008), LR+ (33.43; 4.82-231.85), LR- (0.13; 0.08-0.23), accuracy (90.76%; 84.06-95.29%), and Matthews correlation coefficient (MCC) 0.82. Although considering only the probable SARS-CoV-2 infection (PCR-) cases, all the kits studied showed limited values.ConclusionOur data demonstrate the excellent performance of LFA for the diagnoses of definite or probable SARS-CoV-2 infection. There was substantial heterogeneity in sensitivities of IgM and IgG antibodies among the different kits. LFA tests cannot replace molecular diagnostics but should be used as an additional screening tool.

| S-EPMC8339017 | biostudies-literature

Comparison of SARS-CoV-2 spike antibody quantitative titer reporting using the World Health Organization International Standard Units by four commercial assays.

Project description:The accurate measurement of serological response to SARS-CoV-2 vaccination is needed to correlate responses with effective protective immunity. The World Health Organization (WHO) has created an international standard to allow harmonization of immune response assessment to an arbitrary unit across different commercial assays; however, the accuracy of reporting of SARS-CoV-2 spike antibody titers in international standard units (BAU or IU/mL) from commercial assays is not well studied. Here, we report the performance comparison of four quantitative commercial assays testing for SARS-CoV-2 spike immunoglobins using the WHO's international standard. Sera, EDTA-plasma and heparinized plasma collected from individuals who are vaccine naïve or received BNT162b2 (Pfizer/BioNTech), mRNA-1273 (Moderna) or ChAdOx1-S (Oxford-AstraZeneca) were tested using Abbott Architect AdviseDx SARS-CoV-2 IgG II, DiaSorin LIAISON SARS-CoV-2 TrimericS IgG, Roche Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 S and GenScript cPass SARS-CoV-2 surrogate virus neutralization assays. The sensitivities ranged from 90% to 100%, and specificities from 88% to 100%. These four assays had excellent agreement (0.79-0.93) and correlation (0.87-0.97); however, Passing-Bablok regression analysis indicated that data generated by these assays were not comparable. Our data suggests that natural SARS-CoV-2 infection elicited a greater antibody response compared to vaccines, evident by a significantly higher neutralizing antibody titer in unvaccinated individuals who seroconverted.

| S-EPMC9444336 | biostudies-literature

COVID-19 Serological Tests: How Well Do They Actually Perform?

Project description:In only a few months after initial discovery in Wuhan, China, SARS-CoV-2 and the associated coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) have become a global pandemic causing significant mortality and morbidity and implementation of strict isolation measures. In the absence of vaccines and effective therapeutics, reliable serological testing must be a key element of public health policy to control further spread of the disease and gradually remove quarantine measures. Serological diagnostic tests are being increasingly used to provide a broader understanding of COVID-19 incidence and to assess immunity status in the population. However, there are discrepancies between claimed and actual performance data for serological diagnostic tests on the market. In this study, we conducted a review of independent studies evaluating the performance of SARS-CoV-2 serological tests. We found significant variability in the accuracy of marketed tests and highlight several lab-based and point-of-care rapid serological tests with high levels of performance. The findings of this review highlight the need for ongoing independent evaluations of commercialized COVID-19 diagnostic tests.

| S-EPMC7400479 | biostudies-literature

Rapid diagnostic tests duo as alternative to conventional serological assays for conclusive Chagas disease diagnosis.

Project description:Chagas disease is caused by the parasite Trypanosoma cruzi. It affects several million people, mainly in Latin America, and severe cardiac and/or digestive complications occur in ~30% of the chronically infected patients. Disease acute stage is mostly asymptomatic and infection goes undiagnosed. In the chronic phase direct parasite detection is hampered due to its concealed presence and diagnosis is achieved by serological methods, like ELISA or indirect hemagglutination assays. Agreement in at least two tests must be obtained due to parasite wide antigenic variability. These techniques require equipped labs and trained personnel and are not available in distant regions. As a result, many infected people often remain undiagnosed until it is too late, as the two available chemotherapies show diminished efficacy in the advanced chronic stage. Easy-to-use rapid diagnostic tests have been developed to be implemented in remote areas as an alternative to conventional tests. They do not need electricity, nor cold chain, they can return results within an hour and some even work with whole blood as sample, like Chagas Stat-Pak (ChemBio Inc.) and Chagas Detect Plus (InBIOS Inc.). Nonetheless, in order to qualify a rapidly diagnosed positive patient for treatment, conventional serological confirmation is obligatory, which might risk its start. In this study two rapid tests based on distinct antigen sets were used in parallel as a way to obtain a fast and conclusive Chagas disease diagnosis using whole blood samples. Chagas Stat-Pak and Chagas Detect Plus were validated by comparison with three conventional tests yielding 100% sensitivity and 99.3% specificity over 342 patients seeking Chagas disease diagnosis in a reference centre in Sucre (Bolivia). Combined used of RDTs in distant regions could substitute laborious conventional serology, allowing immediate treatment and favouring better adhesion to it.

| S-EPMC5391121 | biostudies-literature

Serological mechanisms driving cardiotoxicity in COVID-19

Project description:The aim of the study is to investigate the effects of serum from COVID-19 patients on pluripotent stem cells derived cardiomyocytes (PSC-CMs)

2024-03-20 | GSE207473 | GEO

Sensitivity of anti-SARS-CoV-2 serological assays in a high-prevalence setting.

Project description:Evaluation and power of seroprevalence studies depend on the performed serological assays. The aim of this study was to assess four commercial serological tests from EUROIMMUN, DiaSorin, Abbott, and Roche as well as an in-house immunofluorescence and neutralization test for their capability to identify SARS-CoV-2 seropositive individuals in a high-prevalence setting. Therefore, 42 social and working contacts of a German super-spreader were tested. Consistent with a high-prevalence setting, 26 of 42 were SARS-CoV-2 seropositive by neutralization test (NT), and immunofluorescence test (IFT) confirmed 23 of these 26 positive test results (NT 61.9% and IFT 54.8% seroprevalence). Four commercial assays detected anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in 33.3-40.5% individuals. Besides an overall discrepancy between the NT and the commercial assays regarding their sensitivity, this study revealed that commercial SARS-CoV-2 spike-based assays are better to predict the neutralization titer than nucleoprotein-based assays are.

| S-EPMC7856849 | biostudies-literature

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

OmicsDI is an Elixir interoperability service. Learn more ›

Tweets

OmicsDI Databases

PRIDE
PeptideAtlas
MassIVE
JPOST Repository
Physiome Model Repository

EGA
EVA
ENA
LINCS
PAXDB
Cell Collective

MetaboLights
Metabolomics Workbench
MetabolomeExpress
GNPS
BioModels
FAIRDOMHub

ArrayExpress
dbGaP
ExpressionAtlas
GEO
NODE

Information

Databases
Help
API
Contact us
Code on GitHub
Terms of use
Submit Data