Dataset Information

Evaluation of Three anti-SARS-CoV-2 Serologic Immunoassays for Post-Vaccine Response.

ABSTRACT:

Background

In North America, both mRNA vaccines, Pfizer-BioNTech BNT162b2, and Moderna mRNA-1273, each utilizing a two-dose regimen, have started to be administered to individuals.

Methods

We evaluated the quantitative serologic antibody response following administration of either a single dose or both doses of an mRNA SARS-CoV-2 vaccine in a cohort of 98 participants (88 healthcare workers [HCW] and 10 solid organ transplant [SOT] recipients). Antibody levels were compared across three immunoassays: Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 S (Roche Diagnostics), SARS-CoV-2 TrimericS IgG (DiaSorin), and SARS-CoV-2 IgG II Quant (Abbott).

Results

Among HCW, sensitivity ranged from 100% (Roche), 99% (Abbott) and 98% (DiaSorin). The SARS-CoV-2 IgG II Quant and SARS-CoV-2 TrimericS IgG assays showed good agreement with a Pearson correlation coefficient of R = 0.95. Pearson correlation coefficients of R = 0.82 and 0.83 were obtained for Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 S vs SARS-CoV-2 TrimericS IgG followed by SARS-CoV-2 IgG II Quant vs Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 S, respectively. Significant differences in antibody levels between HCW and SOT recipients were observed. A decrease in antibody levels from time of vaccine administration to blood draw was evident. Among those with a second dose, an increase in antibody levels with increased time between administration of the first and second dose was observed.

Conclusions

The absolute values generated from each of the assay platforms are not interchangeable. Antibody levels differed with increased time between vaccine administration and with increased time between administration of the first and second dose. Further, significant differences in antibody levels between HCW and SOT recipients were observed.

SUBMITTER: Di Meo A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8436397 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) emerged in December 2019 and caused a dramatic pandemic. Serological assays are used to check for immunization and assess herd immunity. We evaluated commercially available assays designed to quantify antibodies directed to the SARS-CoV-2 Spike (S) antigen, either total (Wantaï SARS-CoV-2 Ab ELISA) or IgG (SARS-CoV-2 IgG II Quant on Alinity, Abbott, and Liaison SARS-CoV-2 TrimericS IgG, Diasorin). The specificities of the Wantaï, Alinity, and Liaison assays were evaluated using 100 prepandemic sera and were 98, 99, and 97%, respectively. The sensitivities of all three were around 100% when tested on 35 samples taken 15 to 35 days postinfection. They were less sensitive for 150 sera from late infections (>180 days). Using the first WHO international standard (NIBSC), we showed that the Wantai results were concordant with the NIBSC values, while Liaison and Alinity showed a proportional bias of 1.3 and 7, respectively. The results of the 3 immunoassays were significantly globally pairwise correlated and for late infection sera (P < 0.001). They were correlated for recent infection sera measured with Alinity and Liaison (P < 0.001). However, the Wantai results of recent infections were not correlated with those from Alinity or Liaison. All the immunoassay results were significantly correlated with the neutralizing antibody titers obtained using a live virus neutralization assay with the B1.160 SARS-CoV-2 strain. These assays will be useful once the protective anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody titer has been determined. IMPORTANCE Standardization and correlation with virus neutralization assays are critical points to compare the performance of serological assays designed to quantify anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in order to identify their optimal use. We have evaluated three serological immunoassays based on the virus spike antigen that detect anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies: a microplate assay and two chemiluminescent assays performed with Alinity (Abbott) and Liaison (Diasorin) analysers. We used an in-house live virus neutralization assay and the first WHO international standard to assess the comparison. This study could be useful to determine guidelines on the use of serological results to manage vaccination and treatment with convalescent plasma or monoclonal antibodies.

Project description:Past severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection is an important determinant of protection from reinfection and of postvaccine immune responses. Herein, we conducted a follow-up analysis of health care workers previously infected with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) with the aim of evaluating different immunoassays for their capability in detecting the waning anti-SARS-CoV-2 immune responses and accuracy in documenting past SARS-CoV-2 infections. We evaluated serum antinucleocapsid antibody levels in convalescent individuals following a 1.5-year interval from SARS-CoV-2 infection. Three different commercial immunoassays that qualitatively measure serum antibodies targeting the SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid protein, namely, the Abbott Architect SARS-CoV-2 IgG, the Euroimmun anti-SARS-CoV-2 NCP enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) IgG, and the Roche Elecsys anti-SARS-CoV-2, were tested for comparison of detectability. A total of 38 individuals consented to participating in this follow-up analysis. From assay to assay, seropositivity rate at 18 months from infection varied from lowest at 42% to highest at 92%. The Roche Elecsys immunoassay, dependent on the dual-antigen antibody detection method and tuned for the detection of high avidity antibodies, was most capable of accurately documenting past SARS-CoV-2 infections. Different immunoassays showed variable capability of determining previous infection status under waning antibody concentrations. Immunoassays with lower detection limits are to be selected, and adjusted thresholds are to be considered in order to maximize the tests' performance. IMPORTANCE Past SARS-CoV-2 infection is an important determinant of protection from reinfection and of postvaccine immune responses. Our results show that different immunoassays, by design, harbor variable capability of tracking SARS-CoV-2 infection under waning antibody concentrations. With each recovered patient standing at a unique time point along the decline curve of antibodies, precise estimation of COVID-19 cumulative incidence remains a challenge. Since future surveillance studies will be targeting more than ever heterogenous cohorts, selecting the appropriate immunoassay is crucial in order to assure reliable decisions about an individual's previous infection status.